House of Representatives
22 November 1979

31st Parliament · 1st Session

  1. House of Representatives
  2. 31st Parliament
  3. 1979

Mr SPEAKER (Rt Hon. Sir Billy Snedden) took the chair at 10.30 a.m., and read prayers.

page 3349

PETITIONS

The Clerk:

– Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows and copies will be referred to the appropriate Ministers:

National Women’s Advisory Council

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled.

The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That the National Women’s Advisory Council has not been democratically elected by the women of Australia;

That the National Women’s Advisory Council is not representative of the women of Australia;

That the National Women’s Advisory Council is a discriminatory and sexist imposition on Australian women as Australian men do not have a National Men’s Advisory Council imposed on them.

Your petitioners therefore pray:

That the National Women’s Advisory Council be abolished to ensure that Australian women have equal opportunity with Australian men of having issues of concern to them considered, debated and voted on by their Parliamentary representatives without intervention and interference by an unrepresentative ‘Advisory Council ‘.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Braithwaite, Mr Innes and Mr Roger Johnston.

Petitions received.

National Women’s Advisory Council

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of Parliament assembled in the House of Representatives, Canberra the humble petition of the undersigned members or organisations listed below and citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That the thorough nationwide investigations by the Working Party highlighted the need to establish the National Women ‘s Advisory Council.

That we believe the Council consistently and democratically demonstrates its wide representation of the interests of all Australian women, as shown by the Draft Plan of Action for the 1980 National Conference to be held in Canberra in preparation for Australia’s participation in the United Nations Decade for Women World Conference in Denmark, July 1980.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray:

That the Parliament will continue its support of the National Women ‘s Advisory Council and its recommendations.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr N. A. Brown, Dr Cass, Mr Innes and Mr Keith Johnson.

Petitions received.

National Women’s Advisory Council

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives of the Australian Parliament assembled.

The petition of certain citizens respectfully showeth:

Their support for an endorsement of the National Women ‘s Advisory Council.

We call on the Government to:

Continue to maintain the National Women’s Advisory Council and increase Federal Government support for its activities.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Connolly and Mr Graham. Petitions received.

Education

To the Honourable, the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives of the Australian Parliament assembled.

The petition of certain citizens of NSW.

Respectfully showeth:

Dismay at the reduction in the total expenditure on education proposed for 1980 and in particular to Government schools.

Government schools bear the burden of these cuts, 1 1.2 per cent while non-Government school will receive an increase of 3.4 per cent.

We call on the Government to again examine the proposals as set out in the guidelines for education expenditure 1980 and to immediately restore and increase substantially in real terms the allocation of funds for education expenditure in 1 980 to Government schools.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Martin, Mr Morris and Mr Uren.

Petitions received.

East Timor

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives of the Australian Parliament assembled.

The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: that in view of the recent revelations of widespread and tragic suffering and death in East Timor, and in view of the fact that despite four years of painful separation less than half of the 600 Timorese approved for family reunion in Australia have been allowed to come from East Timor,

We call on the Australian Government in the most urgent terms:

  1. 1 ) to use its good offices to win access to East Timor for the personnel and resources of Australian aid agencies;
  2. to send an immigration team to Dili immediately to bring to Australia the rest of the 600 Timorese eligible to come;
  3. to relax immigration criteria to allow all of the 2668 Timorese nominated in 1977 to join their families in Australia.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Falconer and Mr Howe.

Petitions received.

Have a Go, Australia’ Campaign

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled.

The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That whereas the ‘Have a Go, Australia’ advertisement currently screened on commercial television portray an Australian continent populated entirely by people with pink, anglo-saxon faces

And whereas this has the effect of presenting an image at variance to our real situation of a population drawn from any races and cultures

And whereas, in particular, the ‘Have a Go, Australia ‘ adertising ignores the Aboriginal people and their culture

Your petitioners therefore most humbly pray that the Members in Parliament assembled will:

Call upon those responsible for the spending of taxpayers’ money on this ‘Have a Go, Australia’ promotion to either give Aborigines and other groups their fair place in any representation of the Australian community or cease such promotion campaign altogether.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Dr Blewett.

Petition received.

Marine Radio Licence Fees

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled.

The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That we oppose the increase in Radio Licence Fees on Marine Radios for the following reasons:

  1. 1 ) Radios are an essential part of safety equipment.
  2. Marine Radio users save the government millions of dollars in search and rescue.
  3. 3 ) Increased licences will deter the boating fraternity from purchasing and using radios for their own, and others safety.

We also oppose the Radio Regulation that allows and encourages the use of CB radios in boats for the following reasons:

  1. 1 ) The difficulties and delays involved in obtaining positive identification that a boat is transmitting the message.
  2. The break down in communication between marine radio bases and boats, and boats using CB radio that are in trouble.
  3. Costs for search and rescue will escalate due to these delays.
  4. Safety standards will be lowered, Sea Rescue Membership will decline, increasing work load on remaining members under less efficient radio communication.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray the government will reconsider the licence fee and also consider a reduction for pensioners.

We also humbly pray that the regulation allowing the use of CB radio in Marine situations be rescinded. by Mr Braithwaite.

Petition received.

Broadcasting Licence in Mandurah-Pinjarra Area

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

  1. That South Western Telecaster Ltd has applied for a broadcasting licence to service the Mandurah-Pinjarra area.
  2. That the application was lodged some eighteen months ago, and that no decision has yet been made.
  3. That the relay station is urgently required to provide a clear radio reception of general and local news of the area.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Federal Government will ensure that the application by South Western Telecaster Ltd for a broadcasting licence in the Mandurah-Pinjarra area will be speedily granted.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Bungey.

Petition received.

National Health Scheme

To the Honourable the Speaker amd Members of the House of Representatives in the Commonwealth Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth whereas:

  1. 1 ) It is our belief that at the next sittings of the parliaments it is the intention of the Government to increase the $2.50 NHS patient contribution.
  2. We the undersigned strongly object to the Government taking this action.

We therefore do ask the Government of Australia not to take the action that is believed intended.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Bungey.

Petition received.

Metric System

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth objection to the Metric system, and request the Government to restore the Imperial system.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Donald Cameron.

Petition received.

Trade Unions

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That the Members of Parliament recognise the contribution of the Trade Union Movement to the development of Australia and the living standards enjoyed by its citizens through such reforms as the eight hour day, the 40 hour week, annual paid holidays, workers compensation and industrial safety regulations.

That most Australians are trade unionists or dependants of trade unionists.

That the protection of living standards is the basic duty of trade unions.

That strikes are used only as a last resort by workers to preserve their living standards, and that current strike action must be viewed in the context of the current economic situation where the average worker is $22 a week worse off than when the Fraser Government was elected in 1975.

Further, that the right to organise in free trade unions is a basic right in a democratic society and is one of the major strengths of such societies. by Dr Cass.

Petition received.

Refugees

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of representatives in Parliament assembled.

The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That a grave threat to the life of refugees from the various States of Indo-China arises from the policies of the Government of Vietnam.

That, as a result of these policies, many thousands of refugees are fleeing their homes and risking starvation and drowning. Because of the failure of the rich nations of the world to provide more than token assistance, the resources of the nations of first refuge, especially Malaysia and Thailand, are being stretched beyond reasonable limits.

As a wealthy nation within the region most affected, Australia is able to play a major part in the rescue as well as resettlement of these refugees.

It should be possible for Australia to: establish and maintain on the Australian mainland basic transit camps for the housing and processing of 200,000 refugees each year; mobilise the Defence Force to search for, rescue and transport to Australia those refugees who have been able to leave the Indo-China States; accept the offer of those church groups which propose to resettle some thousands of refugees in Australia.

The adoption of such a humane policy would have a marked effect on Australia ‘s standing within the region.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Dr Cass.

Petition received.

Telephone Charges

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled.

The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That the changes to the system of telephone charging announced by the Minister for Post and Telecommunications on Tuesday, 5th June, 1979, fail to meet the needs of the people of the Division of Macquarie in the following respects:

  1. The failure to grant local call access to Sydney to the residents of the City of Penrith is a clear repudiation of a promise made to those residents by the Government in 1 977; and
  2. The bulk of the City of Blue Mountains will fail to gain any significant concession through the new arrangements, despite the fact that the City qualifies as a near-Metropolitan area.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the House take action to give all necessary directions to have those subscribers presently in the 047 Zone included in the Sydney Telephone District.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Innes.

Petition received.

Sale of Publicly Owned Enterprises

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled.

The humble petition of undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

There is a definite limit to the quantity of Australia’s mineral resources.

Accordingly our resources should be managed and developed under Australian ownership and control.

Publicly owned trading enterprises and corporations have been established and operated for the benefit of Australians since Federation.

The Commonwealth Banking Corporation, Trans Australia Airlines, Housing Loans Insurance Corporation, Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation, Australian Wheat Board, were all designed to operate to the benefit of our Nation as a whole under public ownership.

The Fraser Government’s irresponsible proposals to sell off our Nation’s interest in the Ranger Uranium Mine, the Housing Loans Insurance Corporation, and to dispose of other successful statutory corporations such as Trans Australia Airlines, would be contrary to the Nation’s interests.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the House of Representatives will reject outright proposals of the Fraser government to sell the Ranger Uranium Mine, the Housing Loans Insurance Corporation, Trans Australia Airlines, and other publicly owned enterprises.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Innes.

Petition received.

Unemployment Benefit

To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

That, as it is clear that unemployment is a long term problem in Australia, the Government should extend to the unemployed the same assistance as is given to any other disadvantaged member of the community. There is an urgent need to alleviate the financial hardship and emotional stress that the unemployed are suffering.

Your petitioners therefore pray:

  1. That the Government adopt positive policies to reduce unemployment,
  2. That the basic Unemployment Benefit be raised to at least the level of the poverty line as calculated by Professor Henderson,
  3. In line with other Social Service additional income awards, and in order to encourage work creation schemes and the fostering of initiative and self respect, that the $6 per week additional income limit be raised to at least $20 per week,
  4. That the financial penalties above the earning of $20 per week, assessed on a monthly basis, be calculated at the same rate as other Social Security benefits.
  5. That the Commonwealth grant subsidies to State governments so that the unemployed can be granted transport concessions in order that they are not penalised in job seeking,
  6. That pharmaceutical and medical concessions be granted to the unemployed equivalent to those received by other Social Service beneficiaries.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Kerin.

Petition received.

Sydney Metropolitan Telephone Zone

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:

The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth our support for the extension of the Sydney Telephone District to include the 047, 046 and 045 Telephone Zones.

Your petitioners humbly pray that the Federal Government will immediately transfer the centre of the Sydney Metropolitan Telephone Zone from Martin Place to a point near the centre of Sydney, i.e. Parramatta.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Staley.

Petition received.

Low Cost Accommodation

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives, assembled:

This petition of concerned inner-Sydney residents respectfully showeth that

Both the standard and availability of low cost housing in this area has reached crisis proportions. There is an alarming rise in the number of homeless people, particularly large families, pensioners, blacks, single parents and the unemployed.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that your Honourable House will

Restore funding to levels commensurate with the magnitude of the housing crisis, under the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement, and other Federal Housing programs including The Homeless Persons Assistance Program. The States Grants (Aboriginal Assistance) Housing Agreement and The Aged Persons Housing Program:

Develop and adopt specific policies to assure low-income families can secure adequate housing in the area they regard as their home; widening access to home ownership for lowincome families; finance for cooperative housing ventures; action against those private developers transactions which disadvantage the existing local community;

Develop a coordinated housing policy, to best use the available monies and resources, producing a Housing Budget Paper to assess all housing-related programs that affect the inner city, and securing a commitment by Cabinet to coordinate the various housing programs.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Uren.

Petition received.

page 3352

QUESTION

MINISTER FOR EMPLOYMENT AND YOUTH AFFAIRS

Notice of Motion

Mr HAYDEN:
Leader of the Opposition · Oxley

– I give notice that on the next day of sitting I shall move:

That the House censures the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs for his action in quoting from a bogus document based on information obtained illegally, and then misleadingly claiming it to be an official Labor Party document.

Mr Viner:

– I am prepared to accept that as a censure motion so that the matter may be dealt with immediately.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I indicate to the Leader of the House that when a notice of motion of censure is given it is within the Standing Orders for a Minister to indicate that it will be accepted as a censure of the Government and thereby receive precedence. There is no such provision to adopt that course of action when the motion of censure is directed against an individual Minister. If it were the intention to take the matter immediately, it would be necessary to suspend the Standing Orders.

Mr Viner:

– I am quite happy to move for the suspension of the Standing Orders to enable the motion to be taken immediately.

Suspension of Standing Orders

Motion ( by Mr Viner)- by leave- agreed to:

That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent the Leader of the Opposition moving forthwith the motion of censure of the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs of which he has given notice for the next sitting.

Motion of Censure

Mr HAYDEN:
Leader of the Opposition · Oxley

– I move:

I resort to the procedure of moving a motion of censure against the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs (Mr Viner) because the Standing Orders leave no other way in which a substantive debate on a matter such as this can take place in the House. It is essential that such a debate take place. There are disturbing implications in the way in which a bogus document has materialised in the past several days, specifically the way in which it has materialised in the hands of Ministers such as the Prime Minister (Mr Malcolm Fraser) and the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs, and the sleazy way in which it has been dribbled into the hands of some innocent Press people.

Government members- Ha, ha!

Mr HAYDEN:

– Well, I confess that that is a malapropism. Perhaps I should have said ‘trusting’ rather than ‘innocent’. The document which has materialised is headed ‘Strictly Confidential- ALP Campaign Planning’. It purports to be a strategy and tactics document of the Labor Party. It is no such thing. It is a concoction and it has been presented by Ministers of the Government. The Liberal Party is implicated. It is bemusing to note the hilarity extensively in the ranks of the Government when clearly their own party has been involved in criminal behaviour in some way. If this were merely a matter of a leak there would be no room for complaint, although there might be room for feeling aggrieved. But it is not a leak, I repeat. There is clear evidence that this bogus document has been drawn together from illegally, criminally illegally, obtained material. David Combe -

Government members- Oh!

Mr HAYDEN:

– I can see the tactic of the Government- orchestrated behaviour like louts; pretending that this is all a lark. I guess that the Government has become so case hardened after such a rapid and extensive succession of scandals affecting its Ministry that it is indifferent now when the latest outrage, the latest scandal, befalls it.

Let me quote what the advertising agency has to say about this, so that we can get some official status to commence the debate. Malcolm Macfie, Managing Director of Mullins, Clarke and Ralph Pty Ltd, the advertising agency which handles the account of the Labor Party, wrote to me today and said this:

Yesterday I examined a document of 26 pages, dated October 1 979. This document carried a cover as below:

ALP CAMPAIGN PLANNING

ALP planning document: -

1 ) Themes, for the pre-campaign and the campaigning proper.

Attitudes of the swingers- communicating with this segment of the electorate.

Agency’s note on campaign preparations.

Agency briefing for ALP candidates- communicating the political message.

Macfie concludes:

No such document has been prepared in this form by myself or any person authorised by this Company. After careful comparison between this document and our own files I am of the opinion that the document I examined has been assembled without authority from confidential material obtained illegally from this Company’s offices.

The Federal Secretary of the Party writes a confirmatory letter on that point. I do not want to delay the House on that. Just let me make one point for the record, however. The bogus document which has been circulated by certain representatives of the Liberal Party is not a Labor Party document. It has not been compiled either by the Labor Party or by any agency working for the Labor Party. It is true that the data which are included in that document draw substantially on a number of separate documents which the Labor Party’s advertising agency, as distinct from the Labor Party, has compiled as working papers to present to the Labor Party. In that respect, the Labor Party is no more committed to what has been prepared and presented than the Liberal Party is committed to documentation which has been prepared by Masius, WynneWilliams and D’Arcy-MacManus (Australia) Pty Ltd, the advertising agency which works for it.

The first occasion on which reference to this document surfaced was last Saturday. The Prime Minister said this:

I am heartened by a current ALP strategy document -

Let me repeat that- ‘a current ALP strategy document’. That is a lie. There is no such ALP strategy document, and the Liberal Party knows it because the Liberal Party prepared the document. The Prime Minister said:

I am heartened by a current ALP strategy document which says, and I quote:

We live in the best country in the world, rich in human and natural resources.

The quotation continues. It comes from page 2 of the bogus document that the Liberal Party has distributed.

The Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs in the Parliament this week referred several times to the ‘David Combe report’, the Australian Labor Party strategy papers’ and the Combe strategy papers’. He then went on to say:

Mr Speaker, I was quoting directly from the document.

He meant the Liberal Party concoction, the fabrication, the most dishonest exercise ever undertaken by any political party. Let the Liberals laugh that off. Their organised brouhaha may reassure them, but it will not reassure the community which will recognise immediately that this country’s affairs are being conducted by a party which comprises a gang of rogues.

Government members interjecting-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The conduct of this debate is not going to be contributed to by the noise, nor will it be contributed to by statements like that from the Leader of the Opposition. I remind the honourable gentleman that his motion is directed against one Minister. That does not give him licence for comments of that kind directed against other members of the House. I therefore ask him to withdraw.

Mr HAYDEN:

-I withdraw, Mr Speaker. On page 3178 of the House of Representatives Hansard, the Minister is recorded as quoting an extract from this bogus document. The extract appears on page 1 1 of the document. It is very important to tie in the Prime Minister and the Minister and another office-bearer of the Liberal Party, whom I will identify in a few minutes, with this document and the way in which it has become available publicly. The fact is that it is possible to establish beyond any doubt that there can have been only one source for this document- the advertising agency.

Let me give honourable members the summary of the justification on that point. There were several documents which had been drawn upon to compile this spurious documentation which the Liberal Party has put together and which it is seeking to distribute in the community. The summary is: Three of those four documents upon which the compilers of this bogus document have drawn were held by the agency and included material not available in any of the copies of those documents circulated elsewhere. Yet all this additional material appears in the ‘stolen document’ as we will call this bogus document. The fourth document involved in this collection of documents from which information was illegally extracted was a single document held by the agency. It was not circulated. The evidence is compelling that material quoted in Press reports this week, by the Prime Minister last Saturday and by one Minister in Parliament comes from a collection of confidential papers which could have been obtained only by illegal means from the offices of the Labor Party’s advertising agency in Sydney.

It may be argued, I guess, as a flimsy defence, that this is the product of a leak. That is nonsense. There has been a pattern of illegal and unethical behaviour by some persons unnamed who are clearly associated with the Liberal Party and Liberal Party representatives. For instance, on 26 October, a person was discovered in the office of Mr Macfie of our advertising agency, who handles our party’s account, going through Mr Macfie ‘s briefcase. That person was apprehended by the police and I understand that the police are still investigating this matter. On 12 November the offices of our advertising agencies were broken into, forcible entry was made and a safe was drilled and broken into- a safe bust job. The significance of that is that, in the view of the experienced police officers from the breaking squad who investigated this matter, the person who conducted the safebreak was a particularly professional safebreaker, the office of an advertising agency is not the sort of office which carries much in the way of cash and professional safebreakers do not waste their time going to offices that carry only petty cash.

All that was removed was $200 in petty cash. But what was in the safe- this would probably have been known in some quarters, or at least suspected- was the comprehensive files concerning the Labor Party at both the State level in New South Wales and the Federal level. It would have been an easy matter for those files to have been removed, copies made, the files replaced and then, to give some verisimilitude of illegal activity associated with the removal of money, the petty cash removed. No one who has any experience in this sort of matter believes that a self-respecting professional safebreaker will waste his time breaking into such a safe. I have experience as a former member of the Criminal Investigation Branch in Brisbane. From that experience I recognise the behaviour of so many members of the Liberal Party.

What pattern of undetected behaviour has there been prior to these two occasions, especially the instance when the person was located on the premises rifling through the briefcase of the executive of our advertising agency who handles all of the detail of our program and the things we are developing in association with our proposed campaigns? That is the Sydney end. It is a matter that is being investigated. The facts are clearly these: The document that the Liberal Party has prepared draws upon several documents which are available only in the agency of the ALP- Mullins, Clarke and Ralph Pty Ltd. There is evidence that there has been illegal entry to that agency, including a safebreaking, and that the safebreaking was undertaken in such a way as to suggest that the theft of money was the purpose of the safebreaking. Clearly, it is the view of experienced police investigators that no professional safebreaker would go to the office of an advertising agency carrying small amounts of money to undertake such a risky venture for such a small return. There was another motivation. One does not use a Rolls Royce to collect cut lunches. Let me come to the Canberra end of the connection.

Honourable members:

Honourable members interjecting

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The House will come to order.

Mr HAYDEN:

- Mr Speaker, I would like some protection from you. I think you are notably reticent today. I want some silence. I would love the Liberals to hear this. Let me come to the Canberra end of the connection- the Baudino connection. Mr Baudino is the national public relations officer of the Liberal Party. On Monday an article appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald. It was trustingly reported by the journalist who had received the document that the story was based on ‘a confidential ALP analysis of voting trends in Australia’. On Tuesday an article appeared in the Australian. It referred to a confidential national campaign strategy’ and an ALP document’. In both cases the journalists had trustingly accepted documentation which had been handed to them, dropped to them in the gallery. The fact is that Mr Baudino, the Liberal Party’s national public relations officer, was responsible for providing that documentation for those two people. In the immortal description of the late Sir Robert Menzies of a former colleague of his, he is a contemptible little squirt.

Let me go further and refer to an even closer and higher association in the Liberal Party- that of its national secretary, Mr Eggleton. It is known that on last Monday week the Australian Financial Review obtained a confidential document about tactics for the Liberal Party. A copy of that document is now floating around this building. I draw the attention of honourable members to some obvious and major similarities in the typing presentation of this document, Tactics for Election Year’ signed ‘Tony E and the bogus document prepared by the Liberals and distributed by the Liberals- Baudino, that contemptible little squirt, as Sir Robert Menzies would have called him, the Prime Minister and the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs. In both cases, one does not have to be an expert to recognise the clear similarity, not only in the typing face but also in the style of setting out pages, the way in which each page is concluded and the indication of the succeeding page.

One does not have to be particularly skilled to draw together the obvious conclusions that the Government, through the Liberal Party, has embarked on a sleazy exercise to propagate information which is quite dishonestly presented as a Labor Party document; that the collation of that information has been carried out in the Liberal Party offices; that a senior officer of the Liberal Party has hawked it to some journalists in this building; and that Ministers are seeking to do likewise. It does not take much intelligence, although it is quite a challenge for most members of the Liberal Party, to recognise that at the Sydney end of this connection clearly criminal behaviour has been associated with break-ins and unauthorised entry into the office of the agency of the Labor Party and that information from documents held there and there alone has been provided for the Liberal Party. It cannot be suggested with any conviction that this information has been obtained in this illegal way and then dribbled to the Liberal Party as a leak. No professional is going to do a Union Carbide Building bust job and just to keep his amateur status leak the information for the benefit of the Liberal Party. Believing that is like believing that whores are in business solely for thrills.

How was the Sydney-Canberra connection bridged? How did Mr Baudino and Mr Eggleton of the Liberal Party obtain this sort of information? Clearly, all of the evidence establishes irrefutably that the information must have been obtained illegally; that it reached the hands of the Liberal Party; that the Liberal Party has now undertaken a particularly active campaign to disseminate this information; that it is a bogus document prepared within the Liberal Party offices; that the national secretary of the Liberal Party, Eggleton, is clearly implicated in some way; and that Baudino, the national public relations officer, is also deeply steeped in the whole arrangement of this bogus exercise designed in some way to embarrass the Labor Party. All that has happened is that the Liberal Party, the Government, has been exposed. It never anticipated that the documentation upon which the Party drew to fabricate this document was held exclusively by the agency of the Labor Party and that it would be impossible to leave doubt on the shoulders of anyone else.

The fact is that the Fraser Government is a scandal-ridden Government. It is a Government that stands on impropriety. It is a Government that has lifted unethical conduct to a high art form, and it does that only through persistent practice. Look at its background: An allegation that goes to the court of attempted bribery of an election opponent, involving a Minister; electorate rigging, involving two Ministers; fixing computer tenders, involving the Prime Minister; widespread tax avoidance, involving numerous Ministers; malfeasance, involving a private company on the part of a former Minister; and rigging land deals on the part of a former Treasurer. The Government gives every indication that it is steeped in villainy. This is a clear case of political espionage. There are associated features of unauthorised entry, breaking and entering, safe breaking, theft and illegal removal of information. In all respects, the strong circumstantial evidence is that the Liberal Party is deeply involved in this escapade; that the national secretary is somehow involved; that Mr Baudino, the national public relations officer, is clearly involved; and that a number of Ministers are involved, including certainly the Prime Minister and the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs. It is a dishonourable Government and it deserves to be rejected. It ought to resign.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Is the motion seconded?

Mr KEATING:
Blaxland

– I second the motion, Mr Speaker. What we have witnessed in the last day or so is another milestone in the depths to which the Liberal Party will sink to gain electoral advantage. The law and order party is again breaking the rules of Australian politics, of the Australian people and of ordinary standards of decency. It will get right down into the sewers. Whether it is constitutional vandalism, burglary or just plain criminal activity, nothing is too hot or too heavy for the Liberal Party. One of the chief rodents in the sewers is the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs (Mr Viner) who is sitting in front of us.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! I remind the honourable gentleman that, although this is a censure motion against the Minister, that language will not be accepted in the Parliament. I ask the honourable gentleman to withdraw that remark.

Mr KEATING:

– I withdraw it, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister (Mr Malcolm Fraser) and the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs have been quoting for days from a Liberal Party document- not a Labor Party document- which they have been falsely misrepresenting as a Labor Party document. The Minister has been claiming in the Parliament, and the Prime Minister claimed at the Liberal Party conference, that it is a Labor Party document. They know full well that it is not. On Tuesday of this week the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs stated:

But not only that, the Combe strategy paper-

He called it ‘the Combe strategy paper’ when he knew very well that it was a paper from his own party. He went on to quote the document as stating, with reference to the swinging voters:

  1. . they will be only vaguely interested in voting for Bill Hayden . . .

He did not even quote directly from page 2 of the document; he quoted selectively. The first line of that paragraph stated:

They-

The swinging voters- think Fraser is a fair sort of all round bastard.

He left that out. How right they are. It says something for the perception of the swinging voters in Australia that they really have the Prime Minister well and truly tabbed. But the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs did not mention that. He just went on to quote from the document and to say that it was a Labor Party document. The Prime Minister referred to the document at the Liberal Party conference. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Hayden) has already quoted Mr Macfie. I will quote him again. He said:

No such document has been prepared in this form by myself or any person authorised by this Company. After careful comparison between this document and our own files I am of the opinion that the document I examined has been assembled without authority from confidential material obtained illegally from this Company’s offices.

That blows completely the idea that it is a Labor Party document. It proves definitely that it was prepared by the Liberal Party. Even worse, Tony Eggleton wrote to the Prime Minister on 18 October 1979 and in the second paragraph of his letter he stated:

As a ‘companion paper’ to this, I will shortly be letting you have -

I emphasise these words- a report and assessment of the ALP’s pre-campaign and campaign tactics.

It was not the ALP’s report and assessment, but a report and assessment obviously from his own party. Obviously the Prime Minister and the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs knew that it was a Liberal Party document, compiled by the Liberal Party, with extracts stolen from the Labor Party’s advertising agency. That is obviously beyond argument. The Liberal Party’s director forwarded that document on 18 October. The Leader of the Opposition has already indicated to the House that Mr Robert Baudino, a member of the Liberal Party secretariat, handed the composite document to journalists this week, also alleging that it was a Labor Party document. We now know that quite clearly the document contained extracts from an agency document which could only have been in the hands of the agency. It dealt with the number of Ministers stood down and dismissed by the Fraser Government. A correction from six to seven Ministers was made in October. The sheet which was corrected was never copied, never distributed. It was stolen from the safe of the advertising agency and it ended up in the hands of Malcolm Fraser, Ian Viner, Tony Eggleton and Robert Baudino. They are apparently the happy receivers of stolen goods.

Opposition members- The gang of four.

Mr KEATING:

– The gang of four: that is for sure. It gets down to this issue: What motive could there possibly have been for anybody to burgle the offices of Mullins, Clarke and Ralph Pty Ltd, the Labor Party’s advertising agency, if it were not for political espionage? Obviously the Liberal Party wanted to gain access to the Labor Party’s campaign thinking not only in New South Wales but also in the Commonwealth sphere. There has been an arranged break-in and a burglary of those offices. The questions have to be asked: Is Robert Baudino the Charles Colson of the Liberal Party? Is Tony Eggleton the knowing receiver of stolen material? Did he realise that it was stolen? The New South Wales police now realise that it was stolen. There was only one copy of it. If it was stolen, what is Tony Eggleton ‘s attitude? He is one of these great figures of the establishment; the erstwhile member of the Commonwealth Secretariat; a Press secretary for former Liberal Party Prime Ministers; and a confidante of the present Prime Minister. Did he realise that it was stolen material? Did he realise that his own organisation had arranged- or probably arranged- for this break-in to occur?

What is the attitude of the Prime Minister and the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs to the fact that they are purveyors of stolen material themselves, that they are shunting stolen material right across the political landscape of Australia? This is a most serious charge levelled against the Government. It is levelled directly against the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs as a member of the Government, and the Prime Minister who has made these documents public. It is a serious charge against the Minister sitting at the table and a serious charge against the whole Liberal Party organisation. The Liberals may guffaw and try to write the issue off, but it is quite clear that there has been a burglary. It is now being investigated by the New South Wales Police. The material stolen was received by the Liberal Party. It was rewritten by the Liberal Party. It was purveyed by the Liberal Party. If honourable members opposite can be happy in government that their organisation, their Prime Minister and their Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs are the purveyors of stolen material, well, they can laugh their heads off. But I know that if it had been the Labor Party in this position it would have been hounded out of office and howled down for the Watergate-style activities which are involved here.

A document was tabled in the Senate today by Senator Carrick, and I will read from it. It is from the Liberal Party of Australia. It states:

Labor’s campaign strategy papers have now received sufficient public exposure in the Press . . . to enable us to start using them to our own political advantage.

The ALP plans (attached) are particularly relevant in respect to current grandstanding by Hayden and Young about unemployment. The campaign strategy points to the hypocrisy of the Labor Parliamentarians- while they are professing their concern about the unemployed, their Party’s campaign ‘blueprint’ virtually ignores unemployment as an election issue.

Government members interjecting-

Mr Hayden:

– You are a gang of bloody crooks, for God’s sake, and you think it is funny. You would take the pennies off the eyes of a dead man. There is one of you in trouble for that.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The Leader of the Opposition will remain silent. I remind the House that serious allegations are being made and because they are serious allegations it is obvious that they are not going to be heard in silence. I cannot expect such allegations to be received in silence, but I am not prepared to accept interjection which is continually orchestrated in the way in which it was just done.

Mr KEATING:

– The document is headed ‘The Liberal Party of Australia, FEDERAL SECRETARIAT, PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL’. It is addressed to the Right Honourable P. R. Lynch, Senator the Honourable J. L. Carrick, the Honourable A. A. Street and the Honourable Ian Viner. It is signed by Tony Eggleton- ‘TE.’. The word ‘blueprint’ is in inverted commas. At the foot of that page beside an asterisk the document states:

ALP paper provided earlier.

In other words, the Liberal Party secretariat is claiming that it is the circulator of this paper which purports to indicate what is in the earlier part of this letter. So any allegations which are seen to be allegations by my leader, or by me; that the Liberal Party is the source and the receiver of this stolen material, are in fact well and truly indicated in this letter- this filthy, snivelling letter written by that corrupt mind, Eggleton, to these corrupt criminals on the front bench of the Liberal Party.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable gentleman will withdraw that remark.

Mr KEATING:

– Why? I will not withdraw that Eggleton is corrupt. I will withdraw that honourable members on the front bench are corrupt, but I will not withdraw that Viner is corrupt.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! I cannot hear what the honourable member for Blaxland is saying, because people behind him are interjecting.

Mr KEATING:

– I will not withdraw that Viner is corrupt. I withdraw that the others are corrupt. I will not withdraw that Eggleton is corrupt.

Mr SPEAKER:

– I have not called upon the honourable gentleman to withdraw other than his statement that the front bench members are criminals and are corrupt.

Mr KEATING:

– That is fair enough, Mr Speaker, because you would not have got a withdrawal anyway. Let me go on to say this: The Liberal Party really has made a gaffe on this occasion. It has put its foot right in it. It has mounted a burglary of the Labor Party’s advertising agency. It has stolen material from the Labor Party. It has rewritten that material and has tried to pass it off as a Labor Party document. It has had its agent wandering around the Press Gallery and handing it out as though it was an authentic Labor Party document. Obviously, it is just part of the dirty tricks campaign which Tony Eggleton and the other thieves over there are thinking up. They are people who have no more integrity than the people who were convicted in the United States for breaking into the Democratic Party campaign headquarters. That matter went to the President of the United States and he was finally dragged out of office. It is not too fine a point to say that the present Prime Minister is far more directly linked to this burglary than Richard Nixon was ever linked -

Mr SPEAKER:
Mr KEATING:

– To the burglary of the Watergate premises.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable gentleman will withdraw that. I remind him -

Mr KEATING:

– Why? There is a direct link. Mr Speaker, let me indicate the link.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! 1 remind the honourable gentleman that the motion is one of censure directed against the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs. In relation to that Minister, I will permit certain things to be said.

Mr KEATING:

– I will include that Minister as well.

Mr SPEAKER:

– If it is in relation to another member of this House, I will not permit that statement. I call upon the honourable member to withdraw.

Mr KEATING:

– I will withdraw that and make it clear that there is a direct link between the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs and the burglary in Sydney in that he is purveying a document in Parliament and quoting from it as ‘the Combe report’, a page of which could only have been stolen from the advertising agency. The sort of letter which we now see published by the Liberal Party is part of a general campaign to besmirch and smear the Labor Party and to gain some kind of political espionage advantage for the Liberal Party at the cost of the Australian Labor Party. The Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs- a man without any reputation in this House, a man who sold the Aborigines down the drain in Queensland and had to be shifted from his portfolio, a man who is a gigolo of the Prime Minister, a hired gun, a smart mouth who will come in here and say and do anything- is now tied up with a criminal action involving a police investigation of a burglary of an advertising agency representing the Australian Labor Party. This is a serious and sad day for the Australian Parliament. It is a serious and sad day for Australian democracy. But it is a more serious day for the Liberal Party of Australia, for its Federal secretariat, for Baudino, for its parliamentary party, for its Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs and for the Prime Minister. The motion moved by the Opposition should be carried, and carried with acclamation.

Opposition members applauding-

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! Honourable gentlemen have been here long enough to know that that behaviour is foolish.

Mr VINER:
Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs · Stirling · LP

- Mr Speaker-

Mr Hurford:

– Are you not getting -

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member for Adelaide will remain silent. I want it to be understood that in conducting this debate -

Mr Dawkins:

– Don’t lecture us now.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! Honourable members will remain silent. I remind honourable members that accusations have been made against the Minister which are indeed very serious. Therefore I expect the House, when a Minister is under censure, to listen to the Minister’s explanation.

Mr Hayden:

– I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker, about the inconsistency of your conduct of affairs in the House this morning. There was unbridled misbehaviour when I was speaking and you scarcely noted it. You are now lecturing the Opposition about a proper standard of conduct- something that I applaud but, I suggest to you, something that has arrived rather belatedly. These people on the other side of the House behaved like street-corner louts this morning -

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! There is no point of order. The honourable gentleman will resume his seat.

Mr Hayden:

– When a serious offence was being discussed and allegations were being made against the Prime Minister, Ministers and the Liberal Party -

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable gentleman will resume his seat.

Mr Hayden:

– You sat there deaf and mute.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I call the Minister.

Mr VINER:

– Let me make one thing quite clear right at the outset. The document which came into the possession of the Liberal Party of Australia came from a Labor Party source.

Opposition members interjecting-

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The Minister will resume his seat. It is not possible for the Minister to be heard while that continual interjecting persists.

Mr VINER:

-What I said at the outset of my reply to the censure motion was that the document which came into the hands of the Liberal Party of Australia came from a Labor Party source. I suggest, Mr Speaker, that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Hayden), instead of looking for a scapegoat on this side of the House, should look for the Judas within his own ranks. That is what he should be doing. Let me also make some facts absolutely clear. The document from which I quoted the day before yesterday was a document typed by the Liberal Party of Australia from the source material to which the Leader of the Opposition refers. That is what he refers to as a bogus document. But it is quite clear from what the Leader of the Opposition has said today that the authenticity of the contents of this document has been verified. There is no question whatsoever about that. I table the papers to which I have referred in the House. The front page is a frontispiece typed by the Liberal Party. The headings are typed by the Liberal Party. All the contents of the document are authentic from the source material as verified by the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr Hayden:

– We prefer to have tabled the stolen documentation upon which that is based.

Mr VINER:

– Let the Leader of the Opposition deny the authenticity of the contents of that document. He cannot do so, of course, because he knows from his own checking that the contents are correct. Perhaps, when I referred to the Combe report, I should have referred to the Mullins report- the report from Mullins, Clarke and Ralph Pty Ltd. There is no question that the material was prepared by the advertising people of the Labor Party, the propagandists for the Labor Party, and was available to the Labor Party. So what we clearly have here today is an attempt by a classic smear campaign to overcome the Labor Party’s own inefficiencies.

Mr Hayden:

– I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. What the Minister is saying is that two days ago when he described this document as a Labor Party document he was lying and seeking to mislead the House. I ask you to judge on that.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the statement that he has just made.

Mr Hayden:

– Well, Mr Speaker, if you believe that he was not lying, in the light of what he says, you would be sold the Sydney Harbour Bridge on a sunny Sunday afternoon.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the statement.

Mr Hayden:

– Yes.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the statement.

Mr Hayden:

-I said: ‘Yes’; I have.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I ask the honourable gentleman to withdraw.

Mr Hayden:

– I withdraw. Is that sufficient for you?

Mr VINER:

– Let me quote the Leader of the Opposition as reported at page 3279 of the Hansard of 71 November.

Mr Scholes:

– I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister just tabled a document. Under the Standing Orders Ministers have the right to table documents relating to the Crown, documents of state. Does a document obtained by the services of a hired criminal have the status of a document of state?

Mr Hayden:

– The Speaker would probably think so today because he has been going against us.

Mr SPEAKER:

-The Leader of the Opposition will withdraw that remark.

Mr Hayden:

– I will withdraw that, too.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I indicate to the Leader of the Opposition that he has made very serious allegations against a Minister. If he wishes to make the allegations, I think in fairness he ought to let the person against whom the allegations are made reply.

Mr Hayden:

-Mr Speaker, I am merely trying to make the point of the inconsistency between your standard of control of the House now and earlier.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The honourable member for Corio will indicate to me the Standing Order to which he is referring.

Mr Scholes:

-I am sorry; I do not have the Standing Order. Standing Orders on the tabling of documents give the Minister -

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! I will not interrupt the debate at the moment. I will defer my decision on that matter until I have had a chance to look at it and then I will decide whether the document can remain tabled or whether it will be withdrawn.

Mr VINER:

– I quote from a statement made by the Leader of the Opposition on 21 November. Page 3279 of Hansard states:

There are strategy papers which have been drawn together by the Labor Party. Those papers have not been collated by the Labor Party . . . into a compendious document -

The Leader of the Opposition said that there are strategy papers which have been drawn together by the Labor Party, and they are the documents to which I referred. I also inform the House of advice that I received this morning. On 12 November five other offices in the building occupied by Mullins, Clarke and Ralph (NSW) Pty Ltd were burgled- broken into- and had cash stolen. On 13 November it was reported that only cash had been stolen. Further up the street, in the permanent building society building nine other offices were broken into. Is the Leader of the Opposition suggesting that the burglar who is supposed to have stolen the Labor Party advertising document did a magnificent cover-up by burgling 13 other offices? As my colleague in the Senate, the Leader of the Government (Senator Carrick), pointed out, this particular document has been circulating since some time in Octoberwell before the burglary of that building on 12 November. The document was known widely to be available. So much for a very transparent attempt to label the material as bogus material, to label the document as a bogus document and to allege that somebody within the Labor Party burgled the premises of Mullins, Clarke and Ralph Pty Ltd.

It is also apparent that this censure motion, transparent as it is, is a last desperate throe by the Leader of the Opposition to regain some credibility within his own party. The document to which I have referred, under the heading of ALP and “Swinging” Voter’, shows the crass stupidity and the rank hypocrisy of the Labor Party and the fact that its Leader holds no credibility whatsoever within the Party or among members of the back bench, who are sitting mute at the moment. The document refers to the swingers; those who show any willingness to change. It states:

Remember that contrary to the popular myth, they -

The swinging voters- are not discerning upper middle class professionals who carefully reason through their vote. They are basically ignorant and indifferent about politics. They vote -

Says this Labor Party document-

  1. . on instinct for superficial, ill informed and generally selfish reasons.

So much for the regard that the Labor Party has for the electors of Australia.

Mr Keating:

- Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. There are two issues here. The first one is that the Minister has claimed that it was a unitary strategy document of the Australian Labor Party. He has now denied that and said that it was a Liberal Party typed document. It came from the Labor Party’s advertising agency, not the ALP.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable gentleman is arguing the point. There is no point of order.

Mr VINER:

-I further quote from this document:

They -

The swinging voters- think Fraser is a fair sort of all round bastard. Despite this -

Say the Labor Party’s propagandists- they will be only vaguely interested in voting for Bill Hayden -

I would put it at even less than vaguely. I think that by the time the next election comes we will find that the swinging voters will not be interested at all in voting for Bill Hayden. Before long Bob Hawke will be breathing so closely down his neck that he will be able to feel it every day he sits in this House.

Mr VINER:
LP

-I will read the rest of the document at the invitation of the Leader of the Opposition. It states:

  1. . and only if, they can get some kind of line on him, preferably one involving some sense of hope for Australia’s future. Giving Bill Hayden some kind of profile -

Does anybody really think he can be given a profile? Not even the members of the Opposition in this House think that. It continues:

Giving Bill Hayden some kind of profile in the minds of these people therefore, is the only communications objective that offers the slightest hope of success.

Because of the indifference of these people, and their information consumption patterns, this objective can be achieved only with a minimum number of thoughts repeated a maximum number of times.

We have heard the shadow Minister for Employment talk about technology. What he is suggesting is that the Leader of the Opposition go in for word processing. I repeat:

  1. . only with a minimum number of thoughts repeated a maximum number of times.

The document continues:

When you are sick of saying it, they’ll just be starting to notice it.

It is a strange phenomenon that every time a Labor Party document is leaked it is alleged that there has been a break-in; yet every time a Liberal Party document is leaked, it is a leak. What has happened in this case is that a leak has developed within the Labor Party and the Leader of the Opposition has quickly gone to water. I suggest that not only can he not walk on water but he cannot even swim through the engulfment surrounding him at the moment. When we come back for the autumn sitting, every day that the Leader of the Opposition sits in this House Bob Hawke will be breathing so closely down his neck and he will be so worried that there is no possibility at all that he will be able to have a profile within the House or amongst the voters.

Mr Uren:

-i take a point of order, Mr Speaker. Would the Minister put his money on it that Bob Hawke will be the Leader of the Labor Party?

Government members interjecting-

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! It really was not that funny.

Mr VINER:

– I think I will invite the honourable member for Port Adelaide (Mr Young) to be the first one to put some money on that bet. As I was saying, the Labor Party, instead of facing up squarely to its own internal shortcomings, seeks to escape into the realms of fantasy. Today we have witnessed a transparent and, if I might say so, stupid attempt to contrive a political scapegoat. As I have said before, instead of looking for scapegoats in this House, the Labor Party would be well advised to search out the Judas within its own ranks. What warped minds and imaginations came up with this preposterous allegation of a break-in by the Liberal Party? Only the Labor Party could dream up allegations of this kind. It dreamed up an allegation when supposedly there was a burglary at Curtin House last year. That has gone the same way as this allegation will go. Shades of the stupidity that gave us the Iraqi breakfast that we all remember so well. It is one thing for a political party to try to cover up for its political embarrassment, but today’s performance really demonstrates the depths to which the Labor Party and the Leader of the Opposition feel they must go; the depths to which the leadership of the Labor Party in this House has sunk. That is why I am prepared to put my money on Bob Hawke. One could almost feel sorry for Labor members if they were not so malicious and deceptive in what they say. The facts I gave to this House at the outset of my speech show that the allegations that this is a bogus document and that there has been a burglary by the Liberal Party are transparent because of their crass stupidity.

The Labor Party has been wounded. Everybody in the Press Gallery of this House knows that the Labor Party has been wounded by the revelation of this document and the revelation of what the Labor Party and its propagandists think about the credibility of the Leader of the Opposition. That is why, when this document became notorious from the fact that I referred to it in this House, the Leader of the Opposition scrambled around the corridors of this Parliament so fast that he scattered the dust everywhere. He has not been able to come up with anything of any credibility. Because of the truth of this matter, as I have given it to the House, it is clear that a monstrous charade has been perpetrated on this House and a monstrous charge without any foundation has been made against me, against the Government and against the Liberal Party. There is no reason at all why this censure motion should be accepted and it will be defeated when a vote is taken.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable gentleman’s time has expired.

Mr HOLDING:
Melbourne Ports

-What this House is dealing with is a crime. It is not just a crime directed against the Labor Party; it is a crime directed against the very fabric of our political structure. What are the demonstrable facts? The first demonstrable fact is that there was a break-in into the offices of the organisation carrying out work for and on behalf of the Labor Party. It is a demonstrable fact that material was taken from a safe in that office and that the material which the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs (Mr Viner) has relied on in this House was obtained from that safe, because there was no other place where the material was recorded.

Let us deal with the credibility of this Minister because not the least serious of the aspects of this matter is that the Minister has lied to the Parliament, clearly and deliberately. Let me quote what this Minister said in the Parliament last Tuesday, as recorded at page 3178 of the Hansard. You were in the chair at the time, Mr Speaker. The Minister described this document as the Combe strategy paper. He did not use the term ‘documents’. He did not talk about a number of documents. He described the document as the Combe strategy paper referring to swinging voters. The Minister in the House today has admitted that there was no one document. He has admitted that the document which was circulated to the Press was typed by the Liberal Party. It is a document based upon a stolen document and it is a document that emanated from within the Liberal Party. The Minister knows that it is one document and last Tuesday when he stood in this House and lied to this Parliament he knew that he was using a document which was the fabrication of his own party, and he admitted that today. The best he could say today was that the document was verified. By whom was it verified? Was it verified by some of his ministerial colleagues, one of whom had to be stood down because of his sleazy operations with land developers who were slinging into the slush funds of the Liberal Party?

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The motion relates to one Minister. That does not give licence to make those comments about another Minister. I ask the honourable gentleman to withdraw that latter part.

Mr HOLDING:

– Let me remind you of your own ruling last Tuesday, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable gentleman will withdraw.

Mr HOLDING:

– I want to remind you of your ruling, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable gentleman will withdraw.

Mr HOLDING:

-What am I to withdraw, Mr Speaker?

Mr SPEAKER:

-I will not repeat what the honourable gentleman said for that will only worsen the situation. The honourable gentleman knows that he made allegations.

Mr HOLDING:

-I will withdraw, in deference to you, Mr Speaker, but I will state this: The Minister says that the document was verified. I want to know who verified it. I am entitled to know,

Sir, on your own ruling of last Tuesday when you were prepared to allow this Minister to lie to the House. That is what he did in the presentation of this document. You allowed him to use that document because he alleged that it was relevant to the motivation of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Hayden). I now want to look at the motivation of the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs and I want to look at this person whom he says verified this document. Was it one of his ministerial colleagues who was up to his eyes in land development finance with a couple of sleazy land developers who were named in the Victorian inquiry into land scandals? Was it a former Minister who had to stand down because he was manipulating electoral procedures? Was it another former Minister who is currently facing serious charges? The Minister talked about verification. Who verified this document?

Two days ago the Minister said that it was one document, the Combe document. He said that it was a Labor Party document. That was the Minister’s statement when he lied to the Parliament. Today he said that the document was typed in the offices of the Liberal Party. He admitted that it was not one document. He said that it was based on a series of documents. The problem isperhaps he was not to know this; perhaps he did know- that it was based upon a document which was in a safe which was burgled. It is as simple as that. What the Parliament is entitled to know when the Minister says that the document has been verified is whether it was verified by the person who did the breaking and entering. He would be the only person who knew where it came from. Was it verified by Mr Baudino, the Liberal Party representative who circulated this material?

Mr Hunt:

– Oh, go on. You leaked it yourself.

Mr HOLDING:

– The Minister for Health is entitled to defend another Minister who has been caught in the act of lying but he does his own honour and credibility no good at all. As a lawyer who has acted for criminals in the past he is entitled to try to defend a Minister against his criminal actions in this matter. They are criminal actions. It is very simple: If an employee of this Government receives a stolen document he is a receiver of stolen goods and the Government will prosecute him. The Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs has used a document which he admits was a Liberal Party fabrication. He tried to produce the document and use it in the Parliament knowing at the time he so used it that the document was a Liberal Party fabrication. He knew at the time that it had been produced in the offices of his own party. Yet he walked into the

Parliament, gave the document a title which he knew as false, and purported to use the document in a debate in a way that was grossly misleading and untrue, having regard to the Minister’s own state of knowledge which he admitted to the Parliament today.

I ask any honourable member to look at the statements made by the Minister in the Parliament last Tuesday. On any honest and objective assessment there can be no doubt that what the Minister was purporting to do was to say: ‘Here is a document. It is called the Combe report. ‘ He even gave it a title. He said: ‘It ought to be accepted as evidence in this House of the strategy and the attitudes of the Leader of the Opposition and the Labor Party.’ I noted his statements today. He now says that the document that he used in that way last Tuesday was typed by the Liberal Party of Australia. He also said that the document was not collated by the Labor Party into a compendious document.

What he is saying very seriously today when he is the subject of a censure motion is that a series of separate documents came into the hands of the Liberal Party Federal Organisation who put it together. Obviously, officers of the Liberal Party put it together. Who gave it the title? It had no title when first obtained by the Liberal Party. That was admitted by the Minister today. Who called it the Combe report? It was the officers of the Liberal Party or the Minister who purported to present that document to the Parliament on the basis that it was an original Labor Party document, titled the Combe report. At the time of making that statement the Minister knew that he was lying to the Parliament.

The Minister is a self-confessed liar. It is as simple as that. It does not come as any surprise to any of us on this side of the House. We have seen the Minister shamelessly use personal correspondence. We have seen him smear and malign people outside the Parliament. His difficulty was that last Tuesday he did not know that the document which was a Liberal Party fabrication contained material which was not even available to the Labor Party. It contained material in a safe which was broken into. The House is entitled to hear from the Minister who verified the document. Did he believe that it was an authentic document? At no stage did the Minister attempt to tell us that. He has lied to the Parliament. He has attempted to deceive the Parliament. He has done so in a way that demeans this institution and the whole of our political process. That is a serious matter. It is not a matter to be treated in some jocular way.

This Government is so desperate that any rules can now be broken. There are no rules governing political behaviour in this society. There is no element of honour or decency left when a Minister of the Crown can use in the Parliament a document which he knows is a fabricated concoction which has come out of the office of his own Party. He knew that last Tuesday. He has admitted knowledge of that today. He stands condemned. When one looks at the parliamentary record one sees that he tried to foist on the Parliament and people of Australia the view that this was a document that emanated from the headquarters of the Labor Party. Has a more mean, despicable and dishonourable act ever been committed by a Minister of the Parliament? Ministers opposite try to laugh it off and say that it is not a serious matter. After all, it is only a break-in! I suppose that it is all right to break into Labor Party headquarters! The Minister for Health chooses to associate himself with these actions. He is equally to blame. I would have thought that any selfrespecting Minister in any self-respecting government would not condone the introduction into our political life of Nixon-style break-ins. Such a Minister should not condone Ministers who in this House act in a way which would do great credit to Richard Nixon. The Minister for Health is a lawyer. I am sorry, I have just been informed by my colleague that he is not a lawyer. If he looked at last Tuesday’s Hansard he would know that on any reasonable and logical conclusion -

Mr Dobie:

– He is an honourable man.

Mr HOLDING:

– He will not be an honourable man if he continues to associate himself with a Minister who has lied to the Parliament, and who is not able to verify a document, portion of which could only be obtained by a criminal act. It is as simple and as clear as that. The House is entitled to expect a better standard of conduct. Whatever the differences that exist in either political philosophy or social belief, if within the Parliament and the Government we cannot establish what is to be regarded as essentially proper and honest political behaviour then our political system is in deep trouble. What the Minister has done in an attempt to smear the Labor Party is to involve himself in actions which are throughly dishonourable and criminal and which demean him and his government. The Minister does not escape today simply by repeating the false and specious allegations and relying upon the numbers of the Government to carry him through. If the Government is prepared to use its numbers on this occasion, as undoubtedly it will, it is demeaning this institution and the whole concept of political honesty and fair play. It is doing untold damage to our political structure. The Minister has lied to the Parliament and to the people of Australia. He deserves the strongest censure of this House.

Mr ELLICOTT:
Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for the Capital Territory · Wentworth · LP

-There has been a little wagering this morning about Bob Hawke. My ministerial colleague said that he would put his money on Bob Hawke. I will not put my money on Bob Hawke for the simple reason that the Opposition will screw him up just as it has screwed up everything else. It will destroy his idealism. Members of the Opposition front bench now- this is partly what this is all about- are men of ambition, men such as my friend, Lionel Bowen, Mick Young -

Mr SPEAKER:

-I think the Minister should refer to members by their proper titles.

Mr ELLICOTT:

– And the honourable member for Blaxland (Mr Keating). All of them are contenders for the seat occupied by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Hayden), and they have the strange belief that at some time they might occupy the seat of the Prime Minister (Mr Malcolm Fraser). I tell them now that that will not happen. This is a miserable attempt by the Leader of the Opposition to defend the weak position in which he now finds himself, both inside the Labor Party and also in the wider electorate. This is an attempt to cover up his own inefficiency as a leader and his own ineffectiveness. That is partly what this matter is about. The rest of what it is about is this: Quite clearly, in all probability there is somebody in the Labor Party who handed over some documents which in substance are contained in the document the subject of this debate.

Mr Scholes:

-Mr Speaker, I take a point of order. I object to the Minister suggesting that a criminal act in New South Wales, which involved the robbery of a safe, was committed by a member -

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable gentleman will resume his seat.

Mr Scholes:

– If the Minister was honest he would give the name of the person who provided him with the document to the police in New South Wales so that that person could be prosecuted for his illegal action.

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable member for Corio knows that he transgresses the rules very badly by continuing to speak when I have asked him to resume his seat.

Mr Scholes:

– Sorry.

Mr SPEAKER:

– There is no point in his apologising afterwards because he, of all people in this House, ought to know just how serious that offence is. I call the Minister.

Mr Scholes:

– He accused the Labor Party of breaking a safe, because that is where the document came from.

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable member for Corio will resume his seat.

Mr ELLICOTT:

– The point I want to make is simply that when any reasonable minded person, including members of the Press- at this stage they can be reasonable minded- looks at the facts as I will cover them, he will conclude that somehow, somewhere, somebody who is associated with the Labor Party has handed over these documents. I have very little doubt that that is what has happened. In this Parliament and in the Press, documents are being quoted continuously that have been leaked from one source or another. Leaking is a despicable act. It is as despicable in the Labor Party as it can be in our party. The Opposition should face up to the fact that that is the real issue. Let us see what the facts are. This document -

Mr Scholes:

– The facts are that you know who stole that document and you are covering up for a crook.

Mr ELLICOTT:

– The document that was tabled, which is headed -

Opposition members interjecting-

Mr ELLICOTT:

- Mr Speaker, do I have to be interrupted?

Mr SPEAKER:

-The Minister need not appeal to the Chair for silence because all speakers in this debate have been subjected to interjections.

Mr ELLICOTT:

-I will take it as the natural course of events.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I will intervene when I think it is proper.

Mr ELLICOTT:

– For the benefit of honourable members, I remind them of what I understand my colleague said earlier, that is, that the document which has been tabled- is it here? Where is the document that was tabled?

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable member for Reid took the document, I think.

Mr ELLICOTT:

-Who has the document? Where is the document?

Government members- He has stolen it.

Mr ELLICOTT:

– Even in the Parliament somebody takes the document out.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I think the honourable member for Reid asked the Clerk for the document. I have not seen it returned. I have not given a ruling as yet as to whether the document can be tabled. When I recover the document I will give a ruling on that. It is not a tabled document as yet.

Mr ELLICOTT:

-I remind honourable members that the document has a frontispiece, if I can call it that, which admittedly was prepared and typed by the Liberal Party secretariat. There are headings to a number of sections on the next page, two of which state: ‘ALP Themes’ and Pre-Campaign and Campaign Proper’. There are headings to other sections of this document. It is not in dispute that those headings were put in the document by the Liberal Party. What is clear, however, is that, apart from that, the contents of this document, which has been tabled and is the subject of debate, were in the hands of the Liberal Party secretariat as long ago as early October. I rely on Tony Eggleton for that information, and I stand on his word. The contents of this document have been in the hands of the Liberal Party secretariat since early October. That gives the complete lie to the assertions that have been made in this House today.

Honourable members interjecting-

Mr ELLICOTT:

– The contents of the document have been in the hands of the Liberal Party Secretariat since early October.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The Minister will resume his seat. When allegations are made across the table I must permit a response to them. But I am not prepared to permit orchestrated interjection. At the moment it is from both sides of the House. I ask honourable members to cease.

Mr ELLICOTT:

-I did not want to repeat what I was saying, but it really is the basis of this whole debate. The substance of this document, which is the subject of the censure motion today, has been in the possession of the Liberal Party secretariat, according to Tony Eggleton, since early October. There is no question that the Opposition admits that the substance of this document- that is to say, the various parts of itcomes from strategy documents prepared by or for the Labor Party. In other words, it came out of its own camp. There is no question about that.

Mr Armitage:

-Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. The Minister is misleading this Parliament. He is stating that this document was prepared by the Labor Party. It was prepared by a firm of consultants, and the Labor Party had nothing to do with it.

Mr SPEAKER:

– There is no point of order. The The honourable gentleman will resume his seat.

Mr Armitage:

– It is time he named the criminal who stole this document.

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable member for Chifley will remain silent.

Mr ELLICOTT:

– Members of the Opposition are really in a bind. On the one hand, they want to say that we stole the document out of a safe on the night of 12 November, when apparently there were five other burglaries involving the pinching of cash in the same building and nine others in the same street, according to the information we have been given. Opposition members say that we pinched the document, yet in the next argument they say: ‘ It is not our document’. What are they talking about? They should make up their minds whether it is their document or not. Of course, it comes out of their stable.

Mr Keating:

– I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. There is a statement by the advertising agency which says that one page of the document could only have been its document. It could not have been with the Liberal Party on 15 October. That is nonsense.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable member will resume his seat. That is not a point of order, it is a point of argument.

Mr ELLICOTT:

– On 20 November, the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs said:

The Australian Labor Party strategy papers are most revealing in what they say -

Later, on 21 November, as recorded on page 3219 of Hansard -

Mr Armitage:

– You are still as crook as Barwick.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The Minister will resume his seat.

Mr ELLICOTT:

– It does not matter, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER:

-If the honourable gentleman is not asking for a withdrawal, we will proceed.

Mr ELLICOTT:

– Opposition members go on with that sort of thing. It just goes over my shoulder. It will not affect me; it will not touch me. I do not take any notice of it in here or outside. So they should give up. In this House on 2 1 November the Leader of the Opposition stated:

First of all, there is no David Combe report. There are strategy papers which have been drawn together by the Labor Party. Those papers have not been collated by the Labor Party- I stress that- into a compendious document such as the Minister quoted from yesterday.

Then he went on. It is quite obvious from those two parts of the Hansard record that the document about which we are talking, which honourable members opposite say has been stolen from a safe, is made up of material that has come out of the Labor Party stable. It has come out because somebody in the Labor Party stable has been disloyal. That is how it has come out, just as documents are leaked out of the Public Service and out of the Liberal Party because people are disloyal. Honourable members opposite are entitled to feel upset about that, but they should not use it as a basis for attacking this Government.

Mr Armitage:

– Name the person. Get yourself off the hook by naming the person. Name the person.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! I recognise that the honourable member for Chifley has a very loud voice, but it is really too loud.

Mr ELLICOTT:

– Really, I felt sorry for the Leader of the Opposition. He was a policeman. It is no wonder that he left the force. He thinks there are self-respecting burglars. I was awakened, I think it was earlier this year, by a burglar. I did not find him self-respecting. I have seen burglars from time to time, in court and outside, but never have I seen a self-respecting burglar. No doubt that is why the Leader of the Opposition left the police force. But what a pity he did not continue with his law course. If he had done so he would not have attempted to put his brief before this Parliament today. It is a baseless, unfounded brief. It has no substance. What is right at the heart of this matter is the fact that whether this document belongs to the Labor Party or to its advisers- it has under a heading which relates to the swinging voter- it constitutes what is basically a slander on the average Australian. No wonder Opposition members are embarrassed. It also throws grave and serious doubt on the capacity of the Leader of the Opposition.

We can understand Opposition members being embarrassed when they read in this document that the swinging voter is vaguely interested in what the Leader of the Australian Labor Party stands for but so far does not have a clue. Of course, that is an admission that the Leader of the Opposition is not getting through to the average Australian, that he is having no effect on the average Australian. No wonder honourable members opposite feel embarrassed. No wonder, on what we understand will be the last day of this session of Parliament, they are driven to desperation to bring forward a motion such as this in this way.

The document states:

Remember that contrary to the popular myth, they are not discerning upper middle class professionals who carefully reason through their vote. They are basically ignorant and indifferent about politics. They vote on instinct for superficial, ill informed and generally selfish reasons.

In other words, these people who Opposition members think will put them into power are not interested in what Mick Young wrote in his book. They are not interested in unemployment; they are not interested in anything but themselves; they are ill-informed; they are generally selfish. They are the sorts of people to whom the Labor Party, according to its own advisers, is trying to appeal. This is a slander on the average Australian. I would like to believe that the average Australian is interested, that the swinging voter is interested in unemployment and in all the big issues that face us. This document is completely and utterly an embarrassment to the Labor Party.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The Minister’s time has expired.

Mr SCHOLES:
Corio

-Mr Speaker-

Motion ( by Mr Fife) put:

That the question be now put.

The House divided. ( Mr Speaker- Rt Hon. Sir Billy Snedden)

AYES: 72

NOES: 34

Majority……. 38

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Original question put-

That the motion (Mr Hayden’s) be agreed to.

The House divided. ( Mr Speaker-Rt Hon. Sir Billy Snedden )

AYES: 34

NOES: 72

Majority……. 38

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the negative.

page 3367

QUESTION

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Mr ANTHONY:
Deputy Prime Minister · Richmond · NCP/NP

– I ask that all questions be placed on the Notice Paper.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! I will return to the business paper when honourable members return to their seats. The Deputy Prime Minister has asked that all questions be put on notice. He is entitled to do that and it will be done. I will return to the paper to call notices in a moment.

page 3367

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable member for Reid has indicated to me that he wishes to make a personal explanation relating to the last debate, which I will permit. But I should tell him beforehand that I have decided to allow the tabling of the document in accordance with the practice of the House.

Mr UREN:
Reid

-I was not in the House, but I understand that the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Ellicott) said that I stole the document that had been tabled.

Mr Ellicott:

– I just want to say to the honourable member for Reid that I did not say that.

Mr UREN:

-Well, what did you say?

Mr Ellicott:

– If any words that I said -

Mr UREN:

-What did you say?

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The Minister will resume his seat. The honourable member for Reid will remain seated. We have just had an example of what happens when members- Ministers or otherwise- get to their feet without being called. There is then haranguing across the table. I will not have it. The honourable member for Reid has my indulgence to make an explanation.

Mr UREN:

– I was not in the House at the time but I was informed when I returned to the House, particularly by the boys, the members, on the Government side, that I had stolen the document that had been tabled. What happened was that, when the document was tabled, I went to the Clerk of the House and asked whether I could have the document. I took that document, with the knowledge of that officer, and handed it directly to the honourable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr Holding)- he was the next speaker on the Opposition side- to examine the document. That document never left that table. That was the situation. I later left the chamber. At no time did I remove the document from the chamber. Mr Speaker, what concerns me -

Mr SPEAKER:

– I think that the honourable gentleman -

Mr UREN:

– What concerns me is that a man who is supposed to represent the law -

Mr SPEAKER:

-Order! The honourable gentleman -

Mr UREN:

– Makes an accusation without knowing what are the facts.

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable member will resume his seat.

Mr ELLICOTT:
Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for the Capital Territory · Wentworth · LP

– I would like to say to the honourable member for Reid (Mr Uren) that I have too much respect for him to make any allegation against him to the effect that he stole a document or would do anything that was improper, in relation to the procedures of this House, of that character. I simply sought the document and I was told by the Clerk at the table that it had been given to the honourable member for Reid. I then assumed that the document must have been with the honourable member and then -

Mr Uren:

– You assumed?

Mr ELLICOTT:

– Yes, I did because he -

Mr Uren:

– I thought you were a man of the law.

Mr ELLICOTT:

-Perhaps I had better -

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable member for Reid will remain silent. The Minister has quite properly withdrawn any imputation whatsoever about which the honourable member for Reid may be sensitive. But I think that what has been said is worth saying because although it was said in jest- not by the Minister but by interjectors around the House- what is said in jest, when in print, does not have the sense of fun in which it was said. I assure the honourable member for Reid that what was said was in fun. I do not believe that it was said by the Minister but by a number of interjectors.

Mr UREN (Reid)-Mr Speaker, I rise only to object to the word that you have just usedsensitive’. I am not sensitive at all.

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable member for Reid is not sensitive and I withdraw.

Government members interjecting-

Mr SPEAKER:

– Honourable members on my right will remain silent while the honourable member for Reid and I straighten out the matter.

Mr UREN:

– I am not sensitive at all on this issue but I want to put the record straight.

Mr ELLICOTT (Wentworth-Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for the Capital Territory)- There is only one question that arises out of what the honourable member for Reid (Mr Uren) said; that is, why the honourable member for Melbourne Ports (Mr Holding) did not clarify the matter as it was alleged.

Mr SPEAKER:

– I am not going to allow that to be said. It is only making a debate of something that was said in fun.

page 3368

CIVIL AVIATION (CARRIERS LIABILITY) ACT 1976

Notice of Motion

Mr MORRIS:
Shortland

-I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move:

That this House:

1 ) Notes that on the Civil Aviation (Carriers Liability) Act 1976 the maximum compensation available in the event of personal injury or death in a domestic air accident is $45,000;

recognises that this amount is totally inadequate when compared with the level of damages being awarded to victims of motor vehicle and industrial accidents;

further notes that in June 1970 the then Minister for Civil Aviation, Senator Cotton, stated that air accidents compensation limits should keep pace with increases in average weekly earnings;

observes that in these terms the air accident compensation limit should be raised to at least $85,000; and

is of the opinion that the Civil Aviation (Carriers Liability) Act 1976 should be amended to:

raise the limits of air crash compensation to at least $85,000; and

that the Cotton formula be applied forthwith as a basis for determining levels of air crash compensation.

page 3369

AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY

Notice of Motion

Mr NEIL:
St George

– I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move:

That this House:

Deplores the dominance of the Labor Party by the extreme left wing;

notes with alarm, proposals of abolition of the States, removal of powers of the Senate, and nationalisation of industry based upon Marxist Leninist dogma; and

therefore, resolves to completely reject these policies.

page 3369

AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY

Notice of Motion

Mr DEAN:
Herbert

– I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move:

That this House views with concern:

1 ) the alarming movement within the Australian Labor Party towards socialist centralism, to the particular detriment of the less populous States and of people living in remoter parts of the nation;

Labor policy which seeks to strip the Senate of its general power to reject proposed laws;

Labor policy which seeks to amend the Constitution to provide for its alteration by a simple majority of the electorate; and

the view of at least one prominent Labor Party member that the States should be abolished.

page 3369

VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS

Dr EVERINGHAM:
Capricornia

-Mr Speaker, I seek your indulgence to draw to your attention an anomaly in the records of the House. On page 1205 of the Votes and Proceedings of20 November 1979, the last two lines read:

Debate adjourned (Dr Everingham), and, by leave, the resumption of the debate made an order of the day for a later hour this day.

My recollection is that leave was not obtained. The Hansard record has not indicated this and I draw your attention to it because it was a matter of debate with the honourable member for Corio ( Mr Scholes ), earlier in the week.

Mr SPEAKER:

– I will check the record and if it is incorrect I will have it corrected.

Mr VINER:
Leader of the House · Stirling · LP

-Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, I wish to make a personal explanation with regard to the matter raised by the honourable member for Capricornia (Dr Everingham ).

Mr SPEAKER:

-The honourable gentleman may proceed.

Mr VINER:

– I approached the honourable member to see whether he would be prepared to debate the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Bill that night. I introduced the Bill earlier that day. The honourable gentleman agreed to that course being followed. After I had read my second reading speech, the appropriate questions were put to have the debate on the second reading of that Bill adjourned to a later hour of that day.

Mr SCHOLES:
Corio

-The Hansard record will show that leave to proceed on that day was not, in fact, granted. As that was the substance of a disagreement with the Chair later in the day it is a matter of some substance now because, if leave had been granted, the Chair would not have been -

Mr SPEAKER:

– I take the point that has been made by the honourable member. I do not think, one way or the other, that there is any point that may lay against any honourable member or any Minister. In fact, it is a discretion of the Chair, when the adjournment question is put, whether the Chair proposes a question to adjourn the debate to a later hour that day or another day of sitting. Generally, that discretion rests in the Chair and if there is any error it might have been because of me. I apologise to the House. I will have the record corrected if a correction is needed.

page 3369

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING SERVICE

Mr SPEAKER:

-For the information of honourable members, I present a response by Mr President and myself to the Sixth Special Report of the Joint Committee on Publications entitled The Australian Government Publishing Service and its role in Commonwealth printing and publishing 1964-1978’. On 23 November 1978, the Joint Committee on Publications presented its Sixth Special Report, entitled ‘The Australian Government Publishing Service and its Role in Commonwealth Printing and Publishing 1964-78’.

Mr President and I gave the report our earnest consideration. However, because of the fact that most of the recommendations contained in the report came within the province of the Government we withheld our comments until the Executive’s response was made to the Parliament. This response was given on 18 October 1979. As expected, most of the Executive Government’s comments related to the internal administrative arrangements connected with the AGPS, the Government Printer, the Department of Administrative Services, and user departments and authorities. Nevertheless, there are certain matters of principle affecting the Parliament to which Mr President and I wish to refer. I suggest that it may suit the convenience of the House to have the terms of response incorporated in Hansard rather than have me read it out.

The response read as follows-

The first relates to the Government’s response to Recommendation 1 of the Report. Recommendation 1 is as follows:

That at the commencement of each Session of Parliament, a Resolution be agreed to by both Houses of Parliament similar to the following:

That the Government Printer be responsible to the Presiding Officers for the printing of all Parliamentary publications and be provided with the necessary resources to meet Parliamentary printing requirements. That at all times, the Government Printer give priority to Parliamentary work.

The question whether a Resolution be adopted by the Parliament as recommended by the Committee, is, of course, a matter for the Parliament itself to determine, and we do not presume to comment on that particular aspect. Rather, our concern lies in the Government’s response to the recommendation.

With respect to the Government’s comments on the status of the Government Printing Office, we acknowledge that, in relation to the strict administrative responsibilities of Government and its overall publishing requirements, the Government Printer is an agency of Government. However there has been a long-established practice, dating as far back as the establishment of the Printing Office in Canberra, that the necessary priorities of Parliament have been accepted and have constituted a considerable element in the functioning of that Office. We agree with the Government’s comment that the working arrangements for the printing of parliamentary publications have proved satisfactory and we shall be anxious, and vigilant, to ensure that, with mutual co-operation, they remain so.

The next matter of concern also relates to the principle declared above. Recommendation 10 of the Committee’s Report states:

That the Government Printing Office, wherever possible, operate its plant and associated personnel in such a way as to achieve the most effective utilisation of these resources.

The Government, in accepting the recommendation, emphasises difficulties which might be expected from time to time through changes in Government policies, workloads and priorities. Mr President and I would expect that changing workloads and priorities of the Parliament would require similar consideration.

The theme of Government decision-making directed towards Executive rather than parliamentary requirements is continued in the responses to recommendations 92 to 97. The nub of the Committee’s attempt to combine administrative flexibility with accountability to the Parliament may be summarised as follows:

That a Board of Review be established on an inter-departmental basis to supervise Commonwealth printing and publishing, in accordance with a Charter of Responsibilities to be drawn up by Cabinet after consultation where appropriate, with the Presiding Officers; that a permanent secretary and support staff be provided by AGPS; and that the Board report at least annually to the Joint Committee on Publications.

The Government decided not to accept the Committee ‘s recommendation to establish the Board of Review, adopting instead the creation of a Standing Interdepartmental Committee on Government Printing and Publishing. While we appreciate that such a decision was the Government’s to make, we are concerned that, in accepting the proposal of the Committee for a Charter of Responsibilities, the Government has decided that Parliament be excluded from consultation in the drafting of a Charter in so far as that Charter affects the Parliament. Further, there will be no requirement for the IDC to report to Parliament through the Joint Publications Committee.

The Parliament, having special requirements and responsibilities distinct from the Executive, should, in our opinion, be involved in framing the parliamentary aspects of the Charter. We note that the views of the Publications Committee, as expressed in the Report, will be taken into account when the Charter is prepared. Clearly, however, the modifications imposed by the Government’s decision to establish an IDC will necessitate Parliament’s taking a more active role in formulating the Charter. We believe that this role should be undertaken either by the Presiding Officers, as recommended by the Committee, or by the Committee itself. The Government’s failure to provide a formal mechanism for specialist parliamentary scrutiny of publishing activities is also of concern to us.

The final matter of principle we wish to raise relates to the Government’s response to recommendation 108, which states:

That the Standing Orders of both Houses of Parliament be amended to enable the Joint Committee on Publications to:

  1. move from place to place; and

    1. form itself into a sub-committee when considered necessary.

The Government rightly points out that this matter is one for the Parliament to determine. We therefore find it curious that the Government has chosen to proffer the comment that it sees no need for a power to move from place to place. We note that the Committee has previously sought and obtained the permission of the Parliament to move from place to place. We, of course, would be guided by any decision made by both Houses, and would ensure that, within the limits of financial and staffing constraints, the wishes of the Houses if the amendments proposed by the Committee were accepted, would be respected. We propose to take the recommendation of the Committee to the Standing Orders Committee of each House for consideration.

Other matters arising from the Report:

Recommendation 70:

That the Parliament undertake an investigation into the requirements of a complete inquiry and information service for the general public and that the results of such an inquiry be laid before the Parliament as soon as possible.

Comment: This is a matter for the Parliament to determine.

Recommendations 106 and 107:

That the Presiding Officers continue their examination of the most suitable computer information retrieval system for introduction into the Commonwealth Parliament.

That all necessary resources be provided to ensure that the introduction of a suitable computer information retrieval system is introduced into the Parliament at the earliest practical time.

Both of these recommendations have been taken into account in the preparation of a brief to commission an information systems consultant to investigate the information systems of the Parliament. The consultant is expected to begin his investigation in March 1 980.

In conclusion, we note with satisfaction that the Government has already implemented recommendation 42 of the Committee ‘that a mail order service for Members of Parliament be introduced and operated by AGPS Bookshops, excluding Canberra’. We understand that the service has already proved of great assistance to Members and Senators.

We reiterate our concern, however, that the Government should recognise the practical extent of the Government Printer’s responsibilities to the Parliament as an institution.

page 3371

AUSTRALIAN SHIPPING COMMISSION

Mr NIXON:
Minister for Transport · Gippsland · NCP/NP

– For the information of honourable members, I present the annual report of the Australian Shipping Commission 1978-79. Copies of the report are available from the House of Representatives Table Office and the Parliamentary Library. Bulk copies will be distributed during the recess.

page 3371

UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE ROAD ACCIDENT RESEARCH UNIT

Mr NIXON:
Minister for Transport · Gippsland · NCP/NP

– For the information of honourable members I present a report by the University of Adelaide Road Accident Research Unit entitled Adelaide In-Depth Accident Study 1975-79, Part 1 : An Overview ‘.

page 3371

AUSTRALIAN SHIPPERS COUNCIL

Mr NIXON:
Minister for Transport · Gippsland · NCP/NP

– For the information of honourable members I present a substitute version of the annual report of the Australian Shippers Council 1978-79 which I initially presented on 15 November 1979. This is necessary because the final page of the initial report was omitted.

page 3371

BEEF INDUSTRY (INCENTIVE PAYMENTS) ACT

Mr NIXON:
Minister for Primary Industry · Gippsland · NCP/NP

-Pursuant to section 14 of the Beef Industry (Incentive Payments) Act 1977 I present the interim report on the operation of the Beef Industry ( Incentive Payments ) Act 1977.

page 3371

PRIMARY INDUSTRY BANK ACT

Mr HOWARD:
Treasurer · Bennelong · LP

Pursuant to section 10 (2) of the Primary Industry Bank Act 1 977 1 present a report on the Operation of Part 2 of that Act for the year ended 22 November 1979.

page 3371

MIDDLE EAST REPORT

Mr PEACOCK:
Minister for Foreign Affairs · Kooyong · LP

– For the information of honourable members I present a statement in response to the report of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence on the Middle East.

page 3371

TORRES STRAIT TREATY REPORT

Mr PEACOCK:
Minister for Foreign Affairs · Kooyong · LP

– For the information of honourable members I present a statement on the report of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence on the Torres Strait Treaty.

page 3372

AUSTRALIA AND THE INDIAN OCEAN REGION REPORT

Mr PEACOCK:
Minister for Foreign Affairs · Kooyong · LP

– For the information of honourable members I present a statement on the report of the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence on Australia and the Indian Ocean Region.

page 3372

AUSTRALIA AND THE SOUTH PACIFIC REPORT

Mr PEACOCK:
Minister for Foreign Affairs · Kooyong · LP

-For the information of honourable members I present a statement on the report of the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence on Australia and the South Pacific.

page 3372

SUPERANNUATION FUND INVESTMENT TRUST

Mr Eric Robinson:
MCPHERSON, QUEENSLAND · LP

– Pursuant to section 162 of the Superannuation Act 1976 I present the annual report of the Superannuation Fund Investment Trust and the Commissioner for Superannuation 1976-77.

page 3372

PAPUA NEW GUINEA SUPERANNUATION BOARD

Mr Eric Robinson:
MCPHERSON, QUEENSLAND · LP

– Pursuant to subregulation 8A(2) of the Papua New Guinea (Staffing Assistance) (Superannuation) Regulations I present the report by the Commissioner for Superannuation on the operations of the Papua New Guinea Superannuation Board and the Contract Officers (Papua New Guinea) Retirement Benefits Board 1 976.

page 3372

SPECIFIC LEARNING DIFFICULTIES REPORT

Mr VINER:
Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs · Stirling · LP

– For the information of honourable members I present the Government’s response to the report of the House of Representatives Select Committee on Specific Learning Difficulties.

Motion ( by Mr Fife) proposed:

That the House take note of the paper.

Debate (on motion by Mr Hurford) adjourned.

page 3372

COMMONWEALTH LEGAL AID COMMISSION

Mr VINER:
Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs · Stirling · LP

– Pursuant to section 33 (2) of the Commonwealth Legal Aid Commission Act 1977 I present the annual report of the Commonwealth Legal Aid Commission 1978-79.

page 3372

LAW REFORM COMMISSION

Mr VINER:
Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs · Stirling · LP

– Pursuant to section 35 of the Law Reform Commission Act 1973 I present the annual report of the Law Reform Commission 1979.

page 3372

AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF ABORIGINAL STUDIES

Mr VINER:
Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs · Stirling · LP

– For the information of honourable members I present a report by the Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies on the Social Impact of Uranium Mining on the Aborigines of the Northern Territory.

page 3372

BANKRUPTCY ACT

Mr FIFE:
Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs · Farrer · LP

– Pursuant to section 314 of the Bankruptcy Act 1 966 I present the annual report on the operations of the Bankruptcy Act 1979.

page 3372

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS

Mr FIFE:
Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs · Farrer · LP

– For the information of honourable members I present the annual report of the Department of Business and Consumer Affairs 1978-79.

page 3372

DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND ETHNIC AFFAIRS

Mr MacKELLAR:
Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs · Warringah · LP

– For the information of honourable members I present the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs Review 1979.

page 3372

CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT CENTRE

Mr STALEY:
Minister for Post and Telecommunications · Chisholm · LP

– Pursuant to section 40 of the Curriculum Development Centre Act 1975 I present the annual report of the Curriculum Development Centre 1978-79.

page 3373

TECHNICAL AND FURTHER EDUCATION

Mr STALEY:
Minister for Post and Telecommunications · Chisholm · LP

– Pursuant to section 30 of the States Grants (Technical and Further Education) Act 1974 and section 20 of the States Grants (Technical and Further Education Assistance) Act 1976 I present a statement of payments to the States under the States Grants Act.

page 3373

INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS (LOANS GUARANTEE) ACT

Mr STALEY:
Minister for Post and Telecommunications · Chisholm · LP

– Pursuant to section 8 of the Independent Schools (Loans Guarantee) Act 1 969 1 present the statement of the payments made in 1978-79.

page 3373

PROGRESS IN EDUCATION

Mr STALEY:
Minister for Post and Telecommunications · Chisholm · LP

– For the information of honourable members I present a report by the Minister for Education on Progress in Education 1979-80.

page 3373

POSTAL AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT

Mr STALEY:
Minister for Post and Telecommunications · Chisholm · LP

– For the information of honourable members I present the annual report of the Postal and Telecommunications Department 1978-79. As final printing of the report will not be possible until late next week, limited numbers of the report are available from the Parliamentary Library. In addition, other copies of the report are available for interested members from my office.

page 3373

DEPARTMENT OF PRODUCTIVITY

Mr MACPHEE:
Minister for Productivity · Balaclava · LP

– For the information of honourable members I present the annual report of the Department of Productivity 1978-79.

page 3373

PARLIAMENT HOUSE CONSTRUCTION AUTHORITY

Mr ELLICOTT:
Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for the Capital Territory · Wentworth · LP

– Pursuant to section 38 ( 1 ) of the Parliament House Construction Authority Act 1979 I present the first annual report of the Parliament House Construction Authority 1979.

page 3373

QUESTION

STATEMENTS ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND DEFENCE COMMITTEE REPORTS

Mr JACOBI:
Hawker

-Mr Speaker, could I have your indulgence. The Minister for Foreign Affairs presented responses to the reports of the

Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence on both the Middle East and the Torres Strait. I was a member of that Committee. What procedure does one go through to have those responses noted? I have not seen the Minister’s response or the Government’s response to the reports. I think both matters need to be debated in the Parliament. They are both important issues.

Mr SPEAKER:

-My understanding was that the paper was a report by that Committee and that it was tabled for the information of honourable members. The honourable member for Hawker, I suggest, should discuss with the Leader of the House whether a motion might be moved to take note of the paper.

Mr Viner:

– I will do that, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER:

– Which papers is the honourable member referring to?

Mr JACOBI:

– The response of the Minister.

Mr SPEAKER:

-It is not a response; it is an information paper. Which areas is the honourable member referring to?

Mr JACOBI:

– The Government has made a commitment in fact to respond to the reports of the committees of the Parliament. The Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence has presented three reports. The Minister has just presented responses to those reports.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I think that matter ought to be put aside for the moment until clarity is obtained.

page 3373

GREAT BARRIER REEF MAKINE PARK AUTHORITY

Mr GROOM:
Minister for Housing and Construction · Braddon · LP

– Pursuant to section 60 of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 I present the annual report of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 1978-79.

page 3373

STATUTORY RULES PUBLICATION ACT

Ministerial Statement

Mr John McLeay:
Minister for Administrative Services · BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

– I seek leave to make a short statement under section 5 (3b) of the Statutory Rules Publication Act 1 903.

Leave granted.

Mr John McLeay:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

-Amendments of the Public Service (Salaries) Regulations, being Statutory Rules 1979 No. 220, were not available for purchase at the time of publication of the notice of their making in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette No. G 42 dated 23 October 1979, as required by subsection (3a) of Section 5 of the Statutory Rules Publication Act 1903. Copies of Regulations purporting to be Statutory Rules 1979 No. 220 were made available for purchase at the place specified in the notice on 23 October 1979. However, on 6 November 1979 printed copies as distributed were found to contain an error resulting from the inadvertent transposition of two lines of type during the final printing of the regulations. A corrected reprinting of the regulations was thereupon undertaken and correct copies were made available at the specified place on 12 November 1979. Distribution of the reprinted regulations has been completed.

page 3374

PUBLIC DUTY AND PRIVATE INTEREST

Report and Ministerial Statement

Mr ANTHONY:
Deputy Prime Minister · Richmond · NCP/NP

– I present the report of the Committee of Inquiry concerning Public Duty and Private Interest and seek leave to make a statement.

Mr SPEAKER:

-Is leave granted?

Mr Lionel Bowen:

– Leave is granted. I invite the Minister to move that the House take note of the paper at the appropriate stage.

Leave granted.

Mr ANTHONY:

– Honourable members will recall that that the Committee was established by the Government in February 1978 to consider whether principles and measures could be drawn up to promote the avoidance and, if necessary, the resolution of conflict of interest situations in regard to those who hold public office in the Commonwealth sphere. The members of the Committee were the Chief Judge of the Federal Court of Australia, Sir Nigel Bowen, Sir Cecil Looker and Sir Edward Cain, all persons of widely recognised experience and ability. The terms of reference were drawn up broadly to allow maximum scope for the Committee to explore this difficult subject. The Committee has produced a comprehensive and commendable report. The report contains a full examination of the complex and often sensitive issues involved and provides detailed recommendations on additional measures for the regulation of conflicts of interest. In view of the many and sometimes complex recommendations, the Government felt it desirable to give the report very careful consideration in order that it might indicate at the outset the position it has taken on the various recommendations. The Government believes that this will assist the consideration of the report by honourable members and by other persons pending the next sittings of Parliament when there will be an opportunity to debate the matter.

The report covers the whole range of persons who hold office in the Parliament and the Executive. Its recommendations affect members of parliament, Ministers, public servants, statutory office-holders and associated staff. I shall refer collectively to these persons- as the report does- as office-holders. The keystone of the report is a Code of Conduct which should apply to all office-holders. The report contains detailed proposals for the implementation of the Code in regard to the various categories of office-holders. The establishment of new parliamentary committees is proposed, and also special machinery to investigate alleged misconduct in a limited number of cases. New rules are proposed to avoid undesirable conflicts of interest in regard to the movement of officials from government service to the private sector. The Government has accepted virtually the whole of the Committee’s recommendations in regard to Ministers, public servants and other officials.

Other recommendations will be of more direct concern to the Parliament, touching as they do on Parliament, its procedures and its members. Whilst the Government is, generally speaking, favourably disposed towards those recommendations, it would wish to see them considered and debated in the Parliament before any decisions are taken. The Code of Conduct to which I referred embodies principles to be observed by all office-holders. In view of their importance I propose to read them. They are:

  1. An officeholder should perform the duties of his office impartially, uninfluenced by fear or favour.
  2. An officeholder should be frank and honest in official dealings with colleagues.
  3. An officeholder should avoid situations in which his private interest, whether pecuniary or otherwise, conflicts or might reasonably be thought to conflict with his public duty.
  4. When an officeholder possesses, directly or indirectly, an interest which conflicts or might reasonably be thought to conflict with his public duty, or improperly to influence his conduct in the discharge of his responsibilities in respect of some matter with which he is concerned, he should disclose that interest according to the prescribed procedures. Should circumstances change after an initial disclosure has been made, so that new or additional facts become material, the officeholder should disclose the further information.
  5. When the interests of members of his immediate family are involved, the officeholder should disclose those interests, to the extent that they are known to him.
  6. When an officeholder-other than a Member of Parliament- possesses an interest which conflicts or might reasonably be thought to conflict with the duties of his office and such interest is not prescribed as a qualification for that office, he should forthwith divest himself of that interest, secure his removal from the duties in question, or obtain the authorisation of his superior or colleagues to continue to discharge the duties.
  7. An officeholder should not use information obtained in the course of official duties to gain directly or indirectly a pecuniary advantage for himself or for any other person.

  8. An officeholder should not:

    1. a ) solicit or accept from any person any remuneration or benefit for the discharge of the duties of his office over and above the official remuneration;
    2. b) solicit or accept any benefit, advantage or promise of future advantage whether for himself, his immediate family or any business concern or trust with which he is associated from persons who are in, or seek to be in, any contractual or special relationship with government;
    3. except as may be permitted under the rules applicable to his office, accept any gift, hospitality or concessional travel offered in connection with the discharge of the duties of his office.
  9. An officeholder should be scrupulous in his use of public property and services, and should not permit their misuse by other persons.
  10. An officeholder should not allow the pursuit of his private interest to interfere with the proper discharge of his public duties.

The Government has accepted the Code in principle as the basis for particular action to be taken in regard to particular categories of officeholders. The Code is a statement of the broad principles to which effect will be given, in the first place, in relation to Ministers, public servants and other officials. The Government accepts, as the report proposes, that every effort should be made to secure the widest possible familiarity with an observance of the Code. I draw attention in particular to the fourth principle in the Code, which requires disclosure by an office-holder of an interest he possesses which conflicts or might reasonably be thought to conflict with his public duty, or improperly to influence his conduct in the discharge of his responsibilities in respect of some matter with which he is concerned. Other principles spell out clearly the obligation that rests on those who hold public office to avoid taking advantage of their position for their private gain. The emphasis on the disclosure by an office-holder of a possible conflict between a particular private interest and public duty in relation to a particular matter is fundamental to the approach adopted in the report. This approach places a clear obligation on an office-holder to keep under consideration the possibility of conflicts of interest and to declare any such conflict at the appropriate time.

The Government recognises that declaration of private interests will involve an intrusion upon the privacy of those involved, including in some circumstances the privacy of family members. This is a price that has to be paid in the interests of the accountability and integrity of public administration. Concern to minimise the intrusion upon privacy is one of the factors that led the Committee to recommend against the adoption of a general scheme for the registration of interests. The Committee pointed out that a general register is directed to the contingency that an interest might affect an office-holder’s actions. It concluded that the proper practice should be aimed at revealing an interest when it does so, that is, by declaration of an interest when a possible conflict arises. The Committee expressed grave doubts about whether it would be possible to devise a register so as to eliminate lawful avoidance. It concluded that to introduce a register which could easily be avoided would fail to achieve any useful objective; it would be little more than political ‘window dressing’.

The Government finds the arguments against a general register compelling and does not propose to adopt that approach. As I have stated, the emphasis will be on disclosure of interestsdisclosure is all that a register is about- when the relevance of a particular interest becomes apparent. That is the time when disclosure serves a purpose; to alert others to the existence of a possible conflict so that appropriate action can be taken in consequence. The report proposes that the Code should be implemented by means of standing orders, resolutions, staff rules and guidelines as appropriate for the various categories of office-holders, and that enforcement of the Code should be built into existing discpilinary procedures for those categories.

Members of Parliament

The recommendations in regard to the Code of Conduct and members of parliament are broadly as follows:

That each House be invited to adopt the Code in its Standing Orders or by resolution;

That this House be invited to consider the desirability, in considering the recommendations about declarations by members, of strengthening Standing Order 196 which presently provides that a member shall not vote on certain matters in which he has a pecuniary interest;

That both Houses be invited to consider adopting requirements for disclosure of interests in debate along the lines of a House of Commons resolution;

That both Houses be invited to consider including provisions about the time when declarations should be made and the recording of declarations when made; and

That the House and Senate be invited to consider their relevant Standing Orders to see if any amendment is required to avoid conflicts of interest in respect of Committee members.

I should note that the report contemplates that a member should be required to abstain from voting or speaking in exceptional circumstances only- normally a declaration of interest should be sufficient- and that divestment of interests is hardly an option for members except possibly in exceptional circumstances in relation to membership of certain committees. The report recommends that each House consider the adoption of a practice that would apply to the Presiding Officers similar rules as are proposed for Ministers in regard to retention of outside interests. The report also makes proposals for the application of the Code of Conduct to the staff of members of Parliament. The Government sees merit in action along the lines proposed for members and their staff, including, in particular, action to clarify or strengthen the obligation upon members to declare pecuniary interests that are relevant to matters upon which they speak in debate. However, as I have already indicated, the Government proposes to defer further consideration of these matters until there has been opportunity for them to be debated.

I should add that the report recommends review of the provisions in the Constitution that provide for disqualification of members, that is, sections 44 (iv), 44 (v) and 45 (iii) of the Constitution. The Government has referred this matter to the Attorney-General for examination and report.

Ministers

The report recommends that the application of the Code to Ministers be recognised by a letter from the Prime Minister to each Minister and recommends the reinforcement and extension of existing arrangements for the avoidance of conflicts by Ministers, and for declarations of interest, in relation both to the administration of their departments and to Cabinet business. Ministers would be required in certain circumstances to divest themselves of shares and similar interests. The report recommends that the current practice by which Ministers are required to inform the Prime Minister of their interests should be continued and that additional items should have to be disclosed. It is recommended also that existing guidelines concerning gifts received by Ministers should be continued and guidelines concerning acceptance of sponsored overseas travel should be drawn up.

The Government has accepted the recommendations in regard to Ministers and steps are being taken to implement them. Ministers will be required to inform the Prime Minister of their interests in companies, trusts, partnerships and real estate and of their liabilities other than ordinary short term credit arrangements. As recommended in the report, the returns of Ministers’ disclosures of interests will continue to be made to the Prime Minister but will be kept for him on a confidential basis, by the Secretary to Cabinet. The Prime Minister will be able to consult senior Ministers in relation to those returns if he sees the need. As has been the position hitherto, Ministers will have to disclose to their colleagues interests that would conflict with their duty in relation to a matter under consideration by Cabinet.

Disclosure to the Prime Minister will also be called for, so that appropriate action can be taken, where there could be conflict of interest in regard to a Minister’s direction of the business of his Department. In some instances the possibility of such conflict will call for divestment by a Minister of shares or other interests. Requirements similar to those applying to Ministers are proposed for ministerial staff members and the Government has accepted those proposals too.

Public Servants

In regard to public servants, the report recommends that the Public Service Board issue the Code as a general order or some other form of instruction, and that the Public Service Act and regulations should be reviewed to ensure consistency with the Code. There are specific recommendations in regard to declarations by a public servant to a designated officer of an interest which could conflict with his public duty, for the recording of such a declaration and either for the public servant to be authorised to proceed or for other arrangements to be made. The report also deals with steps to be taken to avoid the holding by an officer of interests which could conflict with the duties of his position. The report recommends action to clarify the position in regard to acceptance of certain gifts by the family of a public servant and in regard to acceptance of hospitality. The Government accepts these recommendations concerning public servants and the Public Service Board will consider and report to the Government on details of implementation.

Other Categories

The Government has also accepted the recommendations in the report regarding the application of the Code of Conduct to the Defence Force, parliamentary departments, consultants and contractors, statutory officeholders and the staffs of statutory officeholders and appropriate action will be set in train. Broadly speaking, members of the Defence Force and staff of the parliamentary departments will be required to observe requirements similar to those proposed for public servants. Amendments are proposed to the Public Service Board’s document ‘Consultants and Contractors for Services: Guidelines for Departments and Authorities’ to deal with the possibility of conflicts of interest arising with the engagement of consultants. The proposals in regard to statutory authorities are directed to introducing the requirements of the Code of Conduct, including such matters as avoidance or declaration of conflicts of interest, while having regard to the varying character and role of such authorities. Relevant provisions in the legislation establishing statutory authorities will also be reviewed.

Machinery for dealing with conflict of interest cases

The Committee’s terms of reference required it to give consideration to the procedures that should be followed in determining whether there has been any breach of the standards of conduct required of those in public office. As I have indicated, the general approach taken by the Committee in its report is that implementation and enforcement of the proposed new rules should be built into the existing framework and procedures relevant to the various classes of officeholders. The report recognises, however, that the established machinery for dealing with misconduct or misbehaviour on the part of officeholders may be inadequate or inappropriate in exceptional cases where a high degree of public concern is evident. The Committee saw a need in particular for strengthening the present arrangements for the investigation of allegations of conflicts between public duty and private interest concerning members and Ministers. The Committee concluded that special machinery should be established to deal with a very limited number of matters.

Parliamentary Ethics Committees

The Committee has recommended in the first place the strengthening and formalising of the existing parliamentary machinery for dealing with allegations of conflict of interest concerning members. It has recommended that each House be invited to do this by establishing a Standing Ethics Committee empowered to report to the House from time to time on changes in the Code of Conduct and to receive, investigate and report upon complaints of departures by members from the Code. While considering those committee arrangements along the lines proposed may be called for, the Government will defer its consideration of the proposals until the Parliament has had an opportunity to debate them.

Public Integrity Commission

Secondly, the Committee has recommended the establishment of special machinery- a Public Integrity Commission- to investigate cases where the ordinary machinery for dealing with misconduct or misbehaviour may be inappropriate or inadequate. The Commission would be a standing statutory body with powers of a royal commission. Its members would be part time and appointed by the Prime Minister after consultation with the Leader of the Opposition. The Commission would not act on its own initiative but would investigate and report on matters referred by the Prime Minister concerning Ministers, by a House concerning a Minister or member, by the Public Service Board concerning a public servant or by a Minister concerning a statutory office-holder.

The Commission would be required to report to the person or body by whom the matter was referred. The Commission’s report would state the allegations that had been made, the nature of the misconduct in question, and its findings as to whether the allegations had been substantiated. Any disciplinary action in consequence of the facts found by the Commission would be the responsibility of the person or body by whom the matter was referred, not the Commission. The Commission would be an investigatory and factfinding body only. Provision would be made for reports of the Commission to be tabled in Parliament subject, the Government would have in mind, to appropriate qualification in any case where criminal action might follow.

I emphasise that the Commission as proposed would deal with exceptional cases only. In the ordinary course, allegations of breaches of the Code would be dealt with by the relevant House, the Prime Minister, a Minister or the Public Service Board, as appropriate. The Government believes that a Commission of the kind proposed could be of value in exceptional cases. However, having regard to the proposed link between the Commission and the Parliament, the Government will give the matter further consideration following parliamentary debate on the report.

Post-separation Employment

The Committee was specifically requested to consider the question of the employment of former officials in the private sector following separation from government service. The report concluded that mobility from the public to the private sector may occasionally raise conflict of interest problems, and that there may be a need for a time lag before certain classes of officeholders take up particular forms of employment after leaving office. The report has accordingly proposed that senior public servants and certain other officials should obtain official consent if they wish to take up certain forms of employment in the private sector within two years after leaving government employment. Procedures would be laid down for an officer to apply to a committee of officials who would recommend to the appropriate Minister. There would be a discretion to reduce the two-year limit in particular cases. No restrictions are proposed on movement from the private to the public sector.

The Government agrees with the views of the Committee that mobility between the public and and private sectors is in general unobjectionable and even desirable, but that in certain cases it may raise conflict of interest problems. The position of government employees who are involved in procurement and tendering processes is a case in point. The Government accepts the recommendations for restrictions in certain cases on the acceptance of post-separation employment, and for requirements in regard to the reporting of job offers, and action will be put in hand to implement them. In line with the views expressed by the Committee, additional legislation is not at this stage proposed for this purpose.

Criminal Law

The report makes proposals in regard to the criminal law to which I should refer. The Committee has recommended amendments to the present bribery provisions in the Crimes Act 1914. The amendments would extend those provisions to certain situations that may not be covered now, such as where a Commonwealth officer obtains a bribe for a third party, and to cover members of parliament. The Government has agreed to these proposals and will bring forward appropriate legislation in due course. The Committee has also recommended the amendment of the Crimes Act to make it an offence to misuse official information. This proposal, involving as it does the creation of a new offence in a complex area, will require detailed examination.

Categories excluded by Committee

The Committee refers in the report to certain categories of persons for which it has not proposed measures for the regulation of conflicts of interest. Those categories include federal judges, persons associated with media organisations and lobbyists. The Committee did raise the suggestion that bodies presently concerned with the maintenance of standards of conduct in the Australian media should consider adoption, with such modifications as may be necessary, of recommendations of the British Royal Commission on the Press 1977 which are relevant to the disclosure of interests. The British Royal Commission’s recommendations covered, amongst other things, disclosure by a newspaper or periodical of its interests when reporting or commenting on matters in which its publishing group has a business interest.

Conclusion

As I indicated earlier, the report of the Committee covers a lot of ground and deals with difficult questions. It is apparent that the members of the Committee have put a great deal of effort into the inquiry and the report. On behalf of the Government, I express our appreciation to them. The matters dealt with by the Committee are of importance to the maintenance of proper standards by those holding public office and to the integrity of public administration. Honourable members will have an opportunity to consider these matters before they are debated in this House. In the meantime, the Government will proceed, as I said earlier, with the implementation of proposals made in the report that affect Ministers, public servants and other officials. I present the following paper

Public Duty and Private Interest- Report of Committee of Inquiry- Ministerial Statement, 22 November 1979

Motion ( by Mr John McLeay ) proposed:

That the House take note of the paper.

Mr LIONEL BOWEN:
Smith · Kingsford

– The Opposition wants once again to put a number of matters before the Parliament. I say at the outset that I think the report is very weak. It is a very unsatisfactory report and one which I do not think we should adopt. There are reasons for my remarks. First of all, if we look at what is happening in the Parliaments in the States at present, we will notice that in Victoria an effort has been made to deal with this problem. In Victoria there is a register wherein members of parliament will disclose their pecuniary interests. If they do not do so, they are liable to a fine of $2,000 and are likely to be charged with contempt of Parliament. The Victorian legislation also provides for a code of ethics which sets out that all the financial interests of the families of the members of that Parliament also will be disclosed. So we see there an attempt, not completely satisfactory, but at least an attempt, to make it very clear that, if a person holds public office in Australia, his interests should be disclosed.

Whilst we recognise the question of privacy and whilst we recognise the significance of having information disclosed, it is important to look at the matter from the point of view of democracy being strengthened to ensure that people elected to public office or appointed to public office do not get any financial gain by holding that office. That is one of the real issues that the Labor Party has been talking about. We have suggested that our own remuneration and emoluments should be adequate, indeed high enough, to guarantee that people will not be attracted to the idea of using their office to make substantial gain, either directly or indirectly, when it relates to their families.

In New South Wales, it has recently been announced that, as from next year, all members of the Parliament will be required to register their assets with the Clerk of each House. I will indicate the nature of what that would mean. It would mean that, if a member had shares in companies or if he had debentures, they would need to be noted. All a member’s sources of income and the capacity in which that income was derived would have to be noted. All the positions that a member held, whether in partnerships or professions, would be noted. All a member’s interests in real property and the location of that property would be noted. All gifts exceeding $500 in value and all gifts which, in aggregate, exceeded $500 in value in any one year would be noted. Sponsored travel or holiday sponsorship where there was some suggestion of commercial link would have to be registered also. Overseas transactions relating to benefits that a member obtained either directly or indirectly would also have to be noted. Members would be required to make a statutory declaration of their interests for the previous year within three months of the appropriate motion being passed. I make this point: In New South Wales, any member who wilfully withholds information or who wilfully gives wrong information will be in contempt of Parliament and will be liable to suspension or expulsion.

Mr Graham:

– Is that the law in Sydney now?

Mr LIONEL BOWEN:

Sitting suspended from 1 to 2.15 p.m.

Mr LIONEL BOWEN:

-Before the suspension of the sitting we were discussing the report of the committee of inquiry concerning the public duty and private interest of members of parliament and office holders. The Opposition is critical of the Government’s attitude and the report. I was making the point that in Victoria and New South Wales there are much more stringent obligations on members of parliament to disclose in the register their pecuniary interests. The

Labor Party in its submission to the Bowen inquiry made the point that it did not think that it was too difficult to draw up a statement of principle to detect where private interests may conflict with public duty. In order to give a strong democracy a chance to survive we think it is essential that a register of pecuniary interests be made available to the public. Those of us who have been here for some time are also aware of the Joint Committee on Pecuniary Interests, which was commonly known as the Riordan Committee. It was the committee which discussed this very matter. That Committee quite properly said the discovery and prevention of dishonesty was not the principal aim or perhaps not even an aim at all, of the proposal for declaration of members’ interests. However, action taken to restore, or perhaps to endow, the public with faith in the democratic process is essential.

During the hearings of the Riordan Committee it was suggested by witnesses that stringent financial disclosure might deter potential candidates. The Committee said:

We consider that the absence of such requirements breeds cynicism and the widely held view that politicians are crooked’. Members of Parliament are entitled to private lives, they are not, however, entitled to withhold from the public information directly related to the public interest and the public trust which they carry.

Those comments were contained in the unanimous report of the Riordan Committee.

Mr Jacobi:

– And a very good report.

Mr LIONEL BOWEN:

-It was an excellent report. We have said before that people who want to go into public life should be encouraged so to do. We want the very best that we can get in Australia. They should be well paid and have adequate remuneration but we think that the suggestion that they should also have other sources of income, assets and other means whereby either they or members of their families will benefit through their office detracts from democracy. The public is entitled to know all the details of our pecuniary interests. I propose to move a motion in this regard at a later stage.

The Committee that has produced the report has failed in what we would have liked to have seen achieved. I say this advisedly. The Committee may have felt that it was protecting us but I think that what it suggests in its report leaves us open to further problems of self-regulation. The Committee makes the point that self-regulation may be abused to the point that there is no regulation at all. Undoubtedly, one of the factors that encouraged the move for the imposition of a statutory obligation enforced by the court on members of Congress in the United States was a belief that in the past Congress was not prepared to discipline its own members. That was so even though facts showing serious misconduct were widely publicised. We can get into the same position if we make laws for ourselves which are different from those we make for other people. We should not be in that position. Whilst both Victoria and New South Wales have gone some way along the road towards public disclosure, we ought to go the full way. In the submission that the Labor Party made to the Bowen inquiry we said:

  1. . there is an abiding public cynicism of politicians and the political process which can only be eradicated by firm action from the holders of public trust demonstrating that confidence is justified.

The Government’s proposals do nothing to restore public confidence in politicians or in the Parliament. The key weakness in the Government’s decision is that there will be no public register outlining all the pecuniary interests of all members of parliament and their immediate families; nor is there any adequate penalty for failure to disclose potential conflicts of interest. The Cabinet is out of touch with reality. The public would say that the political arena has been discredited already, particularly over the last few years, by a lack of probity. There is not much point in trying to suggest that everything will be all right if the judicial commission were to be called the integrity commission. There is no hope with a slogan; we have to get to the fundamentals. I think that Government back benchers are a little closer to reality. They virtually laughed the suggestion out of the party room when it was proposed. I understand that the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Anthony) had to do something about it, with good cause. Even the Hamer Liberal Government in Victoria has gone further than this Government with its pecuniary interests legislation.

Mr Jacobi:

– And the South Australian Labor Government.

Mr LIONEL BOWEN:

-The South Australian Labor Government did too. The Wran Government in New South Wales is also doing something about establishing a register and implementing other measures which are far more stringent, as they should be, than what this Government now proposes. We think that the report is very weak. It can be deemed to have failed to grapple with the problem. It will only bring disgrace on us if we implement its recommendations. That is putting it mildly. There is only one way in which to solve the conflict between public duty and private interest, and that is by total disclosure. That was the tenor of our submission. Yet the Government not only is not prepared to support the rules of disclosure but also is prepared to take the view that this information should not be put on the public record.

In the course of the Bowen inquiry the Prime Minister (Mr Malcolm Fraser) insisted on giving his evidence in camera. That set a very poor lead as to whether the Committee would be strong enough to talk about public disclosure. The Committee was invested with the task of resolving the conflict between public duty and private interest. I regret to say that it has come down very much on the side of private interest. The Deputy Prime Minister in his statement said:

Concern to minimise the intrusion upon privacy is one of the factors that led the Committee to recommend against the adoption of a general scheme for the registration of interests.

In our submission we made the point that Labor policy is committed to legislation and constitutional reform to protect individual rights and the right to privacy. We are also committed to the right of the public to be informed about the processes of government. That is a superior right. It is one which we support. Clearly there can be a conflict between private interest and public duty. Let me refer to what the United States Deputy Comptroller stated in testimony before the Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Government Relations of the House Committee on the Judiciary. He said:

Obviously, the Congress faces a difficult dilemma in seeking to accommodate the policy considerations underlying requirements for public disclosure of personal financial information and the right of personal privacy which affects all of us.

The Committee on the Judiciary summed it up in the following way:

Here the primary concern is promoting confidence in public officials through a code of ethics and full financial disclosure of their personal financial status.

That is the Labor Party’s position. The reporting provisions in this report for members of parliament are totally inadequate. The Minister said:

The Government finds the arguments against a general register compelling and does not propose to adopt that approach.

One could ask why the Government finds the arguments so compelling. It is the intention to protect the private interests of members, particularly Ministers, in the Parliament but not to take the public into our confidence, I see no real value in that sort of compulsion. We will have a situation of continual questioning in the Parliament, obviously encouraged by members of the public, when we try to find out from Ministers and what their interests are or whether there has been a conflict. A register of those interests would get over that problem. They would be known. We would not have the son of exercise that takes place in the House. The Deputy Prime Minister also said:

The Committee expressed grave doubts about whether it would be possible to devise a register so as to eliminate lawful avoidance.

I think that is an insulting situation. To suggest that we cannot devise a register whereby lawful avoidance will not take place is virtually to say that members of Parliament will be able to evade their obligations. To suggest that the Committee thought that does not help the situation and I am surprised that the Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Australia would create the impression, probably unwisely, that members of Parliament would take lawful or unlawful means to avoid publicly declaring their interests. If they did fail to declare their interests I am certain it would come out in public, and we would deal with them. In fact, they would be removed from public life. I do not think any member of Parliament would be anxious to avoid the register.

The Opposition would introduce provisions requiring the disclosure of all shareholdings, directorships, interests in land, gifts, liabilities, and incomes of members of Parliament and their spouses and dependent children. In our view, any member of Parliament who tried to circumvent those provisions should face a substantial fine or imprisonment. In other words, that would be the end of his political career. The threat of imprisonment is the only way to bring out the honesty of a government. It is important to point out that what the Deputy Prime Minister has said will lead only to dishonesty, and we emphasise that point. Other countries- I instance Canada and the United States of America- are taking action to require the public disclosure of financial interests by Ministers. This Government takes the view that members of Parliament should disclose their interests only when they believe that those interests might conflict with their public duties. We have had this problem before. (Extension of time granted). I appreciate that extension of time. I did not look at the clock, and I thank the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs (Mr Viner) for that courtesy. The Opposition wishes to move an amendment. So that there is no further delay, I move:

That all words after ‘That’ be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: the Government be condemned for not making it obligatory for all Members of Parliament to disclose their pecuniary interest and that of their immediate families in a register available to the public’.

That amendment is consistent with our submission and it is consistent with what I have been saying. I think it is the only way to provide some stability in what we are about. I will continue with the point I was making, and I will be brief. We have in public life what is called a shareholding provision. In this Parliament we deal with all sorts of interests that could well mean a rapid escalation on capital gain in certain areas, whether it be in the transport industries, Ansett Airlines of Australia or coal marketing. All these matters can be the subject of decision by governments. It does not augur well if there is a suggestion that the decision was made because of shareholding interests. If those interests are disclosed on a public register they will be obvious to all. But we will always run the gauntlet of it being said that it was done because of private interests. There were difficulties in the Government relating to what could be called the Victorian land revaluation and rezoning position, and a capital gain was made in certain circumstances which meant that a Minister had to leave his portfolio. That was not a Federal matter, but it related to the propriety of conduct on the basis of whether profit was made in circumstances in which it would not otherwise have been made. That brings odium to the situation.

The Opposition is saying that this report is not a good one. It is a shoddy document. It does nothing to respond to the improprieties of people in office, and that includes all of us. The Committee was appointed to try to overcome the odium that attaches to this situation because of past behaviour. It has taken some two years to bring this report to light. The Committee and the Government are saying virtually that we have to go on in the way we did before. That is not good enough. I make the point that there should be public declaration by members of Parliament of all their interests, including their incomes and liabilities. The declarations should be tabled annually. Public servants advising the Government should declare their interests to their permanent head. The permanent head should declare his interests to his Minister. All advisers to Ministers and shadow Ministers should declare their interests to both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. It is for those reasons that I have moved the amendment.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Is the motion seconded?

Mr Jacobi:

– I second the amendment, and reserve my right to speak.

Debate (on motion by Mr Viner) adjourned.

page 3381

REPORT ON TORRES STRAIT TREATY

Mr VINER:
Leader of the House · Stirling · LP

– Following a request earlier today from the honourable member for Hawker (Mr Jacobi), I formally present a statement on the report of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence on the Torres Strait Treaty. I move:

Debate (on motion by Mr Jacobi) adjourned.

page 3382

REPORT ON THE MIDDLE EAST

Mr VINER:
Leader of the House · Stirling · LP

– Following a request earlier today, from the honourable member for Hawker (Mr Jacobi), I formally present a statement in response to the report of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence on the Middle East. I move:

Debate (on motion by Mr Jacobi) adjourned.

page 3382

TRANSITION FROM SCHOOL TO WORK

Ministerial Statement

Mr VINER:
Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs · Stirling · LP

– by leave- The Commonwealth Government is concerned about the problems of young people in making the transition from school to work or to further education, and is prepared to join with the States and the Northern Territory in developing a comprehensive policy to assist them. The Commonwealth will provide additional grants to a total of $150m over five years for a special transition program involving matching contributions from the States and the Northern Territory in the later years. The Commonwealth’s contribution in 1980 will be $25m, rising to $40m in real terms in 1984. It is envisaged that a range of developments in the interests of young people making the transition from school to employment will be stimulated or extended as a result of this initiative and that in the longer term the education system as a whole will become better geared to the needs of young people in the changing circumstances of the 1980s. Our primary concern is the 50,000 young people who now leave school each year with poor employment prospects. We wish to provide appropriate education and training courses for them and also tackle the problem of those in the schools who are likely to be in similar difficulties when it comes their turn to leave.

Developments likely to occur in 1980 with support from the Commonwealth’s provision of an additional $25m include:

Expansion and development of transition courses in technical and further education institutions, including pre-apprenticeship, prevocational and pre-employment courses.

These would be full time courses up to one year in duration to prepare young people for vocations, particularly in the trades and technical occupations where shortages of skilled workers still exist.

Expansion of the number of places available in the Education Program for Unemployed Youth-EPUY.

It is expected that an additional 7,000 places could become available in these TAFE courses in 1980, with substantial further increases in later years.

Development of improved services and techniques for identifying potential early school leavers.

Expansion of school counsellor, vocational education and guidance services to provide more intensive and comprehensive assistance for students at risk and their parents.

Development of alternative courses in schools for potential early leavers.

Establishment of after-school and vacation programs of vocational education and counselling.

Development of ‘link’ courses involving students’ participation in programs combining elements of secondary and TAFE courses.

Teacher development programs- in-service courses and re-orientation programs to fit numbers of teachers for their roles in the development and implementation of alternative courses and identification and counselling of at risk ‘students.

Community education projects to include increasing employers’ and parents’ understanding of school activities and programs to increase teachers’ awareness of specific employment requirements for new employees.

The Government acknowledges that a number of measures is already available from the States and the Commonwealth to assist young people to be better prepared for the world of work. It considers, however, that there is a need for substantial changes and development in education, training and preparation for initial employment for a significant minority of young people who have unsatisfactory experiences at this important and formative stage of their lives. The Government has decided, therefore, to commence a program of special action directed to the transition from education to working life.

The aim of the Commonwealth ‘s policy is that ultimately all young people in the 15 to 19 years age group be provided with options in education, training and employment, or any combination of these, either part time or full time, so that unemployment becomes the least acceptable alternative. Progress towards this objective is seen as involving development of improved techniques for identifying children at school who are likely to be at risk in transition from education to work, improved vocational education and counselling services and provision of alternative courses for at risk* students. Other developments might include extension of work experience and community service programs involving students at school and of ‘link’ courses combining elements of secondary and TAFE courses. Teacher development programs may need to be supplemented or adapted to prepare larger numbers of teachers to implement the changes successfully. In addition, expansion and development of TAFE programs, such as pre-apprenticeship and preemployment courses and the EPUY program, which contribute to the successful transition of young people to employment is regarded as an important element of a comprehensive transition education and training program. In the development of programs the Government would wish to see attention given to the particular problems which girls have in making the transition from education to employment.

It will be important to the success of the new policy that effective guidance and counselling services be available. In addition to making some provision for this in the special funding arrangements, the Commonwealth wishes to review with the States the existing vocational guidance services to see how they can be improved and rationalised. Over a period the Commonwealth wishes to see the pattern of allowances and benefits for young people, and of related assistance to industry, reorganised to ensure that these separate measures provide the appropriate incentives to participation in education and training. This important aspect of a comprehensive policy is being examined, but we do not intend to withdraw or reduce the unemployment benefits presently available to young people.

The developments the Commonwealth proposes follow from the consideration the Commonwealth and the States have been giving to issues in transition for some time. They are consistent with the deliberations of the Australian Education Council, which led the State, Northern Territory and Commonwealth Ministers for Education who constitute the Council, at its meeting last month, to endorse the need for a comprehensive policy on transition from school to work. In my capacity as Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs I was able to attend that meeting. The developments are also a natural consequence of the findings of the Committee of Inquiry into Education and Training. The additional funds will be available for agreed programs in government school and TAFE systems and non-government school systems from the beginning of 1980. They will be provided, as special grants, in addition to the programs of the Tertiary Education Commission and the Schools Commission. Commonwealth grants will be made available under the program for a period of five years as follows, with expenditure adjusted after 1 980 to allow for inflation:

The Commonwealth’s contributions are being offered on the understanding that in 1981 the States and the Northern Territory will contribute a total of $9m for the agreed program and that in later years they will match the Commonwealth’s spending on their government systems dollar for dollar. The particular purposes for which the grants may be spent will be worked out in discussions with State, territorial and nongovernment education authorities to commence immediately the States and the Northern Territory accept the Commonwealth’s offer. The Government will invite the Tertiary Education Commission and the Schools Commission to take account of this new policy in the development of their program proposals.

The problems of transition are not, I stress, an area for government action only. A comprehensive approach to the problems requires the interest, understanding and support of the whole community. Teachers have an obvious and crucial part to play. Parents need to encourage and support their children and to be interested and involved in the vital work of the schools and the decisions made by authorities affecting their children. To a large extent the motivations and attitudes of young people are affected by the expectations their parents have of them and the encouragement they receive at home. Employers should develop closer links with education systems, particularly at the local school level, in the interests of, on the one hand, schools understanding better the requirements of the work place and, on the other hand, employers appreciating more clearly the education processs and the difficulties faced by young people and their teachers in preparing adequately for the complex requirements of life and work in the 1980s and 1990s. Organisations of employees should lend their support and participate in the working out of the new arrangements.

The Government is presenting this initiative as an important and substantial contribution to the difficult problem of equipping our young people for the world of work. With the co-operation and support of the community, the opportunity is now being given to develop a comprehensive approach to the transition from school to work of all young people which, given time, will ensure that the teenage years are productive, constructive and satisfying, and that unemployment is not an option that they would seek rather than participate in the opportunities opened up by a comprehensive transition policy. I present the following paper:

A Comprehensive Policy for Transition from School to Work- Ministerial Statement, 22 November 1979.

Mr YOUNG:
Port Adelaide

-by leave-Mr Deputy Speaker, my colleague, the honourable member for Maribyrnong (Dr Cass), and I have made an arrangement with the Leader of the House, the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs (Mr Viner) to share the time that the Government has allotted the Opposition in which to speak to his statement. The statement cuts across two areas- the way in which schools and educational institutions may be used under and helped by the scheme announced by the Government, and the impact on young people of their entering the work force. As the statement cuts across two areas we would both like to say a few words about it.

Anybody going through the statement which the Minister made today would realise that the scheme, encompassing the expenditure of some money for what the Government now calls the transitionary stage from school to work, is of absolutely no assistance in the year 1979-80. The school leavers, the 250,000 young people who are expected to leave the educational institutions over the next few weeks, will not be assisted one iota by the scheme which was announced by the Government today. I only wish that the back bench members of the Government, who were reported to have put pressure on the Government to announce some job creation scheme, had been successful in their claims on the Government.

The great difficulty is not the preparation of people for the work force; it is the supply of work which is the problem in Australia today. We have 400,000 people who are registered as looking for work, but we know that there are far more than that. We have 250,000 people coming on to the work force from the schools. That is a net increase of 1 10,000. We have an undersupply of jobs. It does not matter whether we send every school leaver through the universities of Australia and give them all the training that our educational institutions can give them, there are still just not enough jobs to go around for all the people who require work.

The Government has been attracted to one of the Australian Bureau of Statistics surveys which showed that a little over 7 per cent of the people interviewed said that they had not received employment because they did not have the necessary educational qualification or skills. The Government horned in on this one result of the survey and said that it was going to do something about the problem. But 47 per cent of the people interviewed said that they did not get a job because there was absolutely no job available. Unless the Government moves to create jobs, we are going to have to live with a permanent army, a very high percentage of unemployed in this country. The Government cannot expect that members on this side of the House or people observing the Government’s actions outside the House are going to take this announcement seriously. Just three months ago, on the first day of the Budget sitting, the Government announced it was going to slash $55m or 69 per cent from the Special Youth Employment Training Program; $55m was taken off on the first day of this session; $10m has been given back in another program on the last day of the session. In spite of the inadequacies of the program, the $55m was helping people to go into the work force. The Government does not seem to understand that a lack of jobs is the problem. It is not necessarily the training, the educational qualifications or the skills of people. This year the Government announced, and beat its chest, that it was going to spend an additional $ 18m on apprenticeship training. But when we got down to the tin tacks and analysed what this additional $ 1 8m was going to do, we found there was going to be an increase in the intake of apprenticeships in Australia of between one per cent and two per cent.

We are still short of 10,000 skilled tradesmen a year in Australia. The Government still intends to bring 10,000 skilled migrants into this country to make up the shortfall here while we refuse to train our own people. Why cannot the back bench say to the Ministers that this is where they have to spend our resources if they are serious about putting people to work? The Government is not serious about putting people to work by saying to someone who has finished three years of high school that he will be better equipped if he finishes five years of high school, in spite of the fact that there is going to be no job available. The Government is not going to assist people to get work by increasing the intake of our universities by 5 per cent a year unless it makes the jobs available in the work force. Unless that is done the Government is not going to be able to put these people to work. That is the real inadequacy of the situation in our economy today. The Government is not facing up to reality; it is not facing up to what is required in this country. It is being condemned throughout the country for a lack of foresight of the problems that we are running into. It was expected- no doubt the Government considered this-that the Government would abolish the payment of unemployment benefits for school leavers. It was quite a serious consideration when it was placed before Cabinet in the last few months of its considerations.

Fortunately, pressure from this side of the House and from people outside the House has made the Government do away with that idea. It could not dare do it politically, but it might do it next year.

The announcement made by the Government today will do absolutely nothing to assist people into the work force. We have a substantial oversupply of labour. While the Government continues with its philosophy of not assisting job creation we are going to have to live with that oversupply of labour. We are going to live with broken families, with crime, with drug offences, with alcoholism, with all the things which come out of high unemployment in this country because the Government refuses to recognise what has to be done. But there are many other people who do recognise it, not just the Labor Party, but a lot of apolitical people outside the Parliament. I hope they will get their opportunity of telling the Government what they think of it about this time next year.

Dr CASS:
Maribyrnong

– by leave- I am speaking because the Minister for Education (Senator Carrick) has put out this statement simultaneously with the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs (Mr Viner). My colleague, the honourable member for Port Adelaide (Mr Young) has already mentioned that the funding provided is chicken feed compared with the cutback in the various schemes offered by the

Government previously for people who need further training. I will not dwell on that point. In the statement the Minister says his primary concern is for the 50,000 young people who now leave school each year with poor employment prospects. I think he is underestimating the problem. As my colleague pointed out, over a quarter of a million young people are going to leave school. About 64 per cent of them will have had less than three years’ secondary school training; so they are hardly trained people. Let me be generous and say that perhaps half of them will get lost in some way or other. I would suggest that the figure the Government is worrying about is closer to 100,000 young people, not a mere 50,000. The inadequacies of the funding is highlighted even more when one looks at the figures in those terms.

The Government is proposing expansion and development of transition courses in technical and further education and full time courses for up to one year in duration to prepare young people for vocations, particularly in trades and technical occupations where shortages of skilled workers still exist. My colleague pointed out that for years the Government has relied on bringing immigrants into the country to fill these vacancies. Now at last the Government is coming round to the view that maybe it should train some of the people here. I agree wholeheartedly. But there is still a further problem which the Government has to consider It is not that we have never trained these skilled people. They keep their jobs, but they soon find that, for a variety of reasons, the conditions of the job are not satisfactory and the rates of remuneration are inadequate. They leave the skilled jobs and go into more congenial, unskilled jobs where they can get more money. For years the Government has been using immigrants to fill these positions. But when the immigrants have been here long enough to learn the language and the ropes, they too learn that it pays them better to get out of these skills and to go somewhere else.

So, sadly, this scheme will not succeed unless the Government does something about that very real problem in relation to the work force and gives a proper reward for people with skills. There are lots of other suggestions made, namely, improved services and techniques for identifying potential early school leavers, and more intensive advice for parents as well as students. These deficiencies in the education system have been known for years. In a speech I made in this House on the States Grants (Schools Assistance) Bill on 14 November I quoted Judith O’Neill. She pointed out that of the early school leavers-most of the children are early school leavers- 64 per cent do not get beyond third year high school. Most of these early leavers are totally ignored. She stated:

  1. . each year large numbers of young people move out of school and into the work force with little time to consider available opportunities for employment, with little or no guidance from others, and with little chance in any case.

That position will be barely changed by this suggestion because the policy is totally inadequate. Advice on this course of action has been given over the years, not the least by the Williams committee which was set up in 1976 and took three years to pontificate. Finally it suggested that it was very important to consider schemes which deal with the problem of youth unemployment, the place of schools and of technical and further education in helping the community and the young unemployed to deal with this problem. In addition, the Schools Commission itself has been reporting along these lines for ages. Those reports were available in time for the Government to have considered the matter for inclusion in the Budget we have just passed for this year, but it was ignored and left. The scheme will not get off the ground next year. Even though the Government is providing funding, nothing will be done, practically nothing will be spent next year. No doubt we will find that although $25m has been allocated, when it comes to the Budget next year most of the funds will not have been spent.

The Government mentions the aim of its policy is that ultimately all young people in the 1 5 to 19-year age group would be provided with options in education, training and employment, or any combination of these, either part time or full time, so that unemployment becomes the least acceptable alternative. I will conclude on this note: That strikes me as a most ominous aspect of this policy. Is the Government serious? Is it really conscientiously wishing to train young people or has it at last recognised that when they leave school and are unable to obtain jobs that they have to be paid unemployment benefit? Is this move now going to be seen as a very clever technique to force them to stay on at some sort of schooling with some financial support less than the unemployment benefit with the threat that, if they do not accept this extra schooling, with the lower support, they will not qualify for unemployment benefit. It implies that the financial support for these young people will really come not just from the Government but significantly from their own families who are already in financial difficulty. In most cases this is probably why the children leave school early as they feel that they have to get out and help their families. Is this proposal that the Government is offering really an alternative, or is it a veiled threat?

Further on the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs (Mr Viner) says:

Over a period the Commonwealth wishes to see the pattern of allowances and benefits for young people, and of related assistance, to industry, reorganised . . .

He also says: we do not intend to withdraw or reduce the unemployment benefits presently available to young people.

I do not know why it was necessary for him to make that statement. Is this a hint? I repeat: Is it a hint? In fact, once the scheme is going, is it the Government’s intention to use this as a device to force the children once again back onto their parents so that the parents will have to shoulder most of the financial responsibility for keeping the children at school and in training.

Mr Yates:

-It won’t.

Dr CASS:

– I hope not. I see some honourable members on the opposite side whom I respect and I trust that it is not the intention of the Government. Let us keep our eyes and ears open to ensure that this does not happen. I am prepared to accept the assurances, but let us note the danger. If the Government does that, it will be consistent with what it is doing on the question of the national health scheme. The Government is quite surreptitiously and consciously on its part, forcing the cost of health care back onto the individuals in the community who are ill and can least afford to pay for it. I fear that this may be what the Government might do in relation to the young unemployed. I hope that I am wrong.

page 3386

RHODESIA

Ministerial Statement

Mr PEACOCK:
Minister for Foreign Affairs · Kooyong · LP

– by leave- I wish to make a statement to the House concerning developments at the London Constitutional Conference on Rhodesia, and concerning the nature and extent of Australian participation if the anticipated settlement is achieved at that Conference. The conflict in Rhodesia has for many years been a most serious international problem. The unilateral declaration of independence by the administration of Mr Ian Smith in 1965 sowed the seeds of a political struggle in Rhodesia between black nationalists and white settler parties that a few years later erupted into a bloody civil war. That war has brought great suffering to the peoples of Rhodesia and the surrounding countries, and has exacerbated racial tensions throughout the region. It has created dangerous opportunities for outside powers to expand their power and influence, and has jeopardised the peace and stability of the entire African continent.

The Australian Government has over the years taken a closer interest in developments in Rhodesia. The internal elections this year, which resulted in the installation of Bishop Muzorewa as Prime Minister, were a step forward as far as the internal situation in Rhodesia was concerned, but they were held under an undemocratic Constitution, and they did not allow for the participation of all Rhodesian political elements. It was almost inevitable, therefore, that the war would continue unabated, with neighbouring countries continuing to support the Patriotic Front guerrilla forces against the Muzorewa Government. The Lusaka Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting, held in August of this year, took place against a most difficult and disturbing situation in southern Africa. It was a situation that was described by the Commonwealth Secretary-General, Mr Ramphal, as one of escalating conflict, with increasing military, economic and social pressures on the African front line states, and in the background a deepening intransigence on the part of Pretoria. The increasing sense of frustration and of anger of black African leaders and their people made it not unlikely that the Lusaka meeting would see a polarisation of the Commonwealth and a possible confrontation that could split the Commonwealth and threaten its very survival.

The Government took the view that the situation then existing in southern Africa was morally wrong, and we believed that it would only enhance the interests and activities of hostile outside nations, including the Soviet Union and its supporters. The Government believed that, if a lasting peace was to be achieved, there was a need for a negotiated settlement between all the parties to the conflict, with the support of the front line states. We were aware of the very great difficulties and the failure of earlier attempts to achieve a settlement, but we saw the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting as providing perhaps the last opportunity for a peaceful settlement. Because of this, and because we value the Commonwealth as a body, the Government worked vigorously to develop a consensus at Lusaka on principles that might allow a settlement to be made. At Lusaka, agreement was reached on six principles that might underlie a peaceful all-party settlement. Shortly thereafter, the British Government convened a conference in London of the opposing parties.

The Conference has been a difficult exercise. Agreement has now been reached on an independence constitution, and on arrangements for the transitional period leading to the holding of free and fully democratic elections in Rhodesia. The Conference is now in its third and final phase- negotiation of arrangements for establishing and maintaing a ceasefire during the transitional period. Provided that this third phase can be successfully concluded, a British Governor will shortly thereafter arrive in Salisbury to assume control of the administration of the country in the transitional period. President Kaunda’s call for a mobilisation of Zambian forces demonstrates the tensions that exist in the southern African region and underlines further the need for a prompt settlement to be reached in London to benefit not only the people of Rhodesia itself but also those in the neighbouring countries.

In the hope and expectation that an all-parties package agreement may be achieved in London, the British Government has sought Australian assistance in the implementation of that agreement in two respects. Firstly, and as the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Anthony) announced on 9 November, the British Government has requested the Australian Government to contribute a contingent to a Commonwealth military ceasefire monitoring force. This request came at a difficult point in the negotiation of arrangement for the transitional period. The Australian Government agreed in principle to this request, subject to an all-parties settlement being reached in London and subject to satisfactory arrangements being worked out for the operation of the Australian contingent. We have since learned that our agreement, and that of the other Commonwealth countries asked to contribute contingents, greatly assisted the successful negotiation of arrangements for the transitional period.

Discussions are proceeding with Britain on these matters, and planning for the Australian contingent is well advanced. The Australian Government has also agreed in principle to assist with the movement of a Fijian contingent from Fiji to Rhodesia, and has agreed to consult with Fiji about the extent to which Australia can provide in-country support to the Fijian contingent. The Commonwealth ceasefire monitoring force will include teams from Britain, Australia, Fiji, Kenya and New Zealand. It will not be physically involved in the maintenance of the ceasefire; nor will it have any responsibility for the maintenance of law and order during the transitional period. Its sole function will be to observe and to report that the agreed ceasefire is being correctly maintained. The safety of the

Australian contingent- and also of the Australian election observers in Rhodesia, to whom I shall refer in a moment- is a matter of particular concern to the Australian Government. In the event of any serious breakdown of law and order in Rhodesia in which the lives of Australian personnel could be at risk, they would be immediately withdrawn after appropriate advice to the British Government. The Australian defence authorities are giving close consideration to all aspects of the physical security and legal protection of Australian soldiers taking part in a Commonwealth ceasefire monitoring force in Rhodesia.

The anticipated duration of the assignment is governed by the length of the transitional period leading up to the elections. It has been agreed at the London Conference that this period would be limited to two months. Allowing time for the announcement of election results and the installation of the new Government, and travel between Australia and Rhodesia, the Australian contingent could be expected to be outside Australia for a maximum of Vh months. The Deputy Prime Minister indicated on 9 November that Britain had requested 10 teams of 1 1 men each-a total of 1 10 men. With a national headquarters staff, this could require a total Australian force of up to 135. It is possible that in the event, a smaller Australian contribution may be all that is needed, depending on the final assessment of the monitoring requirement.

The second area in which Australia has been asked to assist is the sending of election observers. The Lusaka agreement provided for Commonwealth observers to be present during the elections. The British Government has now invited Australia to send a group of such observers to Rhodesia for the pre-election period and the elections. The Government has agreed to send eight persons, provided that a settlement is reached which is in accordance with our understanding of the Lusaka agreement. The composition of the group and its travel and financial arrrangements will be decided following consultations among interested Ministers. The main task of the group will be to report to the Australian Government and Parliament on the conduct of the elections. A small Australian liaison office will be established in Salisbury for the duration of the transitional period. It will maintain liaison with and provide political advice to the ceasefire monitoring contingent and assist the Australian election observers. It will also serve as a direct point of contact between the Australian

Government and the British authorities in Salisbury.

I also wish to state the Government’s position on the removal of the sanctions that have been in force against Rhodesia since the unilateral declaration of independence in 1965. It is possible to engage in some fine legal distinctions about the obligations of United Nations members in regard to the lifting of sanctions. It seems clear to the Government, however, that when all the Rhodesian parties concerned and the British Government have freely agreed to an independence Constitution, freely agreed on arrangements for the holding of elections and the implementation of that Constitution, and when British authority has been re-established in Rhodesia for the purpose of instituting those arrangements, then the objectives for which sanctions were originally imposed will have been achieved. We recognise that for a number of reasons there may be some delay before the United Nations Security Council might be able to take the formal steps which may be thought necessary in respect of sanctions. We hope this process will not be long. For Australia, however, as we are likely to have Australian military and civilian personnel and an Australian liaison office in Rhodesia during the period leading up to independence and as we will, in the circumstances I have described, be satisfied that the objectives for which sanctions were imposed have been achieved, the Government considers- I believe all Members of the House will agree with this-that it would be inappropriate for it to maintain sanctions during that time. A further announcement will be made on this matter in due course.

Finally, I wish to emphasise that the Government’s intention in making this statement is to inform honourable members of the Government’s present intentions and commitments regarding Australian involvement in a Rhodesian settlement, in the event that events at the London Conference proceed to a successful conclusion along the lines that we now hope for.

However, I must end on a note of caution. While it is now reasonable to be generally optimistic about the London Conference’s chances of achieving a final agreed settlement- bearing in mind that the Conference has made enormous progress against heavy odds already- we cannot be certain that it will do so. The agreements achieved so far in London are conditional on an agreed total package, and the discussion of ceasefire arrangements will throw up further difficulties. The Australian Government will therefore take into account developments in the final phase of the London Conference in determining its final position on participation in Rhodesian settlement arrangements. The success of the London Conference to date is most gratifying to the Australian Government.

Mr Yates:

– Thanks to the Minister.

Mr PEACOCK:

-Thank you, indeed. Thanks are also due to the Prime Minister (Mr Malcolm Fraser). It offers real hope that the hatreds and suspicions of the past decades may finally be overcome, in the spirit of the Lusaka agreement. If this can be achieved then the people of Rhodesia can look forward to a happier future that has been for so long denied to them. All Australians will, I am sure, share my hope that the settlement that is now in sight in London may be achieved. I present the following paper:

Rhodesia- Anticipated Settlement- Ministerial Statement, 22 November 1979.

Motion (by Mr Ellicott) proposed:

That the House take note of the paper.

Mr LIONEL BOWEN:
Smith · Kingsford

– The Opposition welcomes the statement on Rhodesia and notes particularly the concluding remarks of the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Peacock) when he spoke about the hatred and the suspicions of the past decade being finally overcome. I say at the outset that it is with some sense of concern that the Opposition notes what is happening in Rhodesia at the present time. I advert to the fact that one of our young Australians, a young Australian Broadcasting Commission correspondent, has been seriously and dramatically involved in an incident this morning which could well cost him his life. Tony Joyce is his name. He has been shot in the head and his chances for survival will be difficult. We hope and trust that he will recover. He was shot in circumstances which, to some extent, will concern all Australians. He apparently was in a police vehicle at the time he was shot and the shot came from outside the vehicle. There was, allegedly, a confiscation of a camera.

I place on record the great work that is done by Australians in this area of the gathering of news. These people risk their lives. We saw the great tragedy in East Timor of five Australian newsmen losing their lives. A shadow has been cast over both governments- I make no excuses; the Labor Government and the present Government- for what happened there. I make that point because obviously with this type of news the situation there is not really as stable as we would have hoped.

Mr Peacock:

– May I simply say that I endorse the remarks which the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has made regarding Tony Joyce, as I did at the Press conference. I inform him that I have dispatched an officer from Dar-es-Salaam.

Mr LIONEL BOWEN:

-I thank the Minister. I mentioned this matter to him this morning, and he was good enough to let me know that he had already sent an officer to Lusaka. I know that the Minister, in accordance with his normal interests and efficiency, will do everything possible to assist. I give him top marks in that regard.

The point I am trying to make relates to the problem we have in Australia in trying to get through the message of what a democracy is about. I do not know that we always succeed. In my experience in the Federal Parliament I had the opportunity to go to the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Jamaica in 1975. The most firm impression I came away from the conference table with at that time was that of President Kaunda and President Nyerere warning the world in April 1975 that there would be severe bloodshed in Rhodesia. They said that they could not stop it. In fact, they understood that it would happen because there was no democracy in Rhodesia. We do not want to get into that argument, but the warning was clear. Big problems exist at the present time. We still see military action taking place in Zambia. There are guerrilla movements and we know that in many cases they are related to other influences. The issue involves freedom, free elections and equal suffrage. All those conditions have to be present if there is to be more stability in the world. This statement is welcome. It embraces the past conflict, the agreement, the British being able to re-establish their authority by way of a governor, the difficulties that Kaunda has experienced in Zambia, the use of a monitoring force, a transition period, election observers, sanctions and what is called a final phase. The total package is still to be delivered. I understand all that. I refer now to the situation in recent weeks.

We cannot avoid querying the involvement of Australia in the past in justifying the Smith regime. There always appeared to be a strong influence in this country, particularly on the Government’s side, to try to prop up that regime because it was argued that it had a future. It has no future. There is an understandable struggle for human rights and self-determination. We can recognise the grave problems for all of us from racial conflict between white and black which creates enormous problems in the world. We can understand the problem but there is no solution in a few phrases. I am mindful of the fact that the air force of Zimbabwe-Rhodesia is probably carrying out fairly extensive military operations in Zambia. The air force is led by a Queenslander, I am told, who is actively involved as the Air Vice-Marshal. Death and destruction is flowing. We have to mention these matters. When Todd and others visited this country some years ago, they warned of all these dangers. Kaunda and Nyerere were warning of all these dangers. The big hope we have is that a peaceful solution may arise. The present difficulties appear to be coming to bear more than ever on Kaunda. I am looking at news as recent as 1 1 November. I quote from the Sunday Mail. It states:

Zambian President Kenneth Kaunda ‘s peacemaking role in Zambabwe-Rhodesia is costing him dearly.

This is a matter of concern to the Opposition because while a peace keeping discussion has been going on and while Kaunda has been playing a leading role in the negotiations, there has been escalating activity against his country on the basis of trying to beat the guerrillas. The article states further:

Rhodesian Army raids into neighbouring Zambia and Mozambique have picked up since the peace force talks started nine-and-a-half weeks ago, culminating in the dynamiting of the Zambian Chambesi River bridge three weeks ago. The vital bridge carried the railway to the Tanzanian port of Dar Es Salaam, and was being used to import 300,000 tonnes of desperately needed maize into Zambia.

Honourable members will see that while these negotiations are going on and the President of Zambia is making a very important effort- as evidenced by what happened in 1975- his own country is getting into more difficulties because of the war being waged against it. Starvation is occurring in Zambia. The Minister for Foreign Affairs said that there is concern that the Zambian forces have now been mobilised. I cannot see how we can reconcile the fact that there has to be a severe escalation of military activity against Zambia and the destruction of its infrastructure which will cause many problems for that country. As honourable members know, the situation could well bring down Kaunda if he cannot control it. What a tragedy it would be if we attributed this merely to guerrilla activity. Our own Tony Joyce was caught up in the conflict this morning when he was trying to film news in relation to a bridge that had been destroyed. He became involved in a dreadful accident, to say the least.

We are also concerned about the type of action that Australia is taking. The action is welcomed from the British point of view but is it the safe attitude for Australia? We are sending a very small force to Zimbabwe-Rhodesia which will total about 135. I am mindful of some of the statements that I read in the London Financial Times. An article states:

The British Government seems to think that a ceasefire runs itself . . . But it can’t be quite as simple as that In the run-up to elections there will certainly be a great deal of intimidation on all sides, if only because the outcome of the election, in which many parties may be competing, is itself so uncertain. Remember, one black party or coalition of parties must get nearly 64 per cent of the black seats if it is to have a majority in the Lower House. What happens if there is an accident’, or if Nkomo or Mugabe fail to discipline their followers?

It is one thing to be a monitoring force, and another thing to be a supervising force. The article makes the point:

If there are flagrant violations of the ceasefire . . . two possible consequences follow: either the Salisbury regime’s security forces will stay in barracks and remain ‘ neutral’, and there may or may not be pitched battles between the followers of Muzorewa and those of the Patriotic Front; or else the security forces will attempt to restore ‘law and order’ and the British governor may find himself in charge of a continuation of the war against the guerillas. In that case, it is difficult to see how he can extricate himself from Salisbury, or how Rhodesia can proceed through elections to freedom and legitimacy.

Honourable members will notice that the guerrillas themselves say that the forces suggested are not large enough; they should be much larger. That statement comes from the guerrilla front itself. The guerrilla leaders want a six-month transition period rather than one of two months. They seek an independent military force, possible from the United Nations, to help to supervise- not monitor- a ceasefire. I draw that distinction. I know that the Government will take these matters into consideration, but the concerns of a number of Australians obviously have to be mentioned. The British have been having discussions about why sanctions are being withdrawn in such a hurry. In opposing sanctions Callaghan mentioned: . . the danger that the Government’s action in appeasing its own back benchers who were not prepared to vote for a renewal of sanctions would be misunderstood abroad.

That seems to be the situation that we could get here. I emphasise again the strong military action against Zambia. A thousand South African and Zimbabwe-Rhodesian troops crossed into Zambia in October. Much damage was done. Death and starvation came to the Zambians. People thought that the situation would be all right if a British governor were there. What would happen if a ceasefire broke down? What would happen if we withdrew sanctions? We want to see peace and we want to see the ability to bring that peace about. Should we not be doing more to comply with the wishes from all sides, not just the wishes of those- well meaning as they may be, and misdirected as they may be- who think that the problem will be solved by a scrap of paper. The issue involves the flesh and blood of people who now have very bitter memories of tragedies of some 16 years of illegal existence.

I have highlighted, in the course of my remarks, the statements which I think are going to be made by many people in the next few weeks. The withdrawal of sanctions leads to recognition of the Rhodesian passport and virtually to the recognition of the entitlement of refugees, whatever race, coming from that area. I think that has to be mentioned. Whilst I can understand the Minister’s saying that he wants to have a withdrawal of sanctions now, I think we ought to wait a little while to see that we are going to get the final result that we want. I am convinced that President Kaunda is far from satisfied with what one might call the integrity of what has been happening from the point of view of the merits of a settlement. He has been belittled and betrayed. There has been an escalation in the war against him and his country and death and destruction in Zambia. I think we ought to be taking more cognisance of that fact rather than rushing into the withdrawing of sanctions to help the situation. Frankly, unless something is done to control the intelligence forces which, in many cases, are masterminding the activities of the Zimbabwe-Rhodesian regime, we will have more troubles in Africa.

Australia is not directly involved. But it will be involved if there is a refugee flood. Australia would be the area to which refugees would come if everything were legitimised and sanctions had been withdrawn. I can well understand that this matter cannot be solved by us talking to each other. Australia had a lot of influence in the past. I put it on record that the British failed in the past. Kaunda and Nyerere have been pleading for years about the problems concerning Rhodesia. They could not get any recognition of the problems of that area. The British Government, of both shades of opinion, seemed to walk away from giving the solution that they want. It appears that a solution may now be reached, but from a military point of view the governor has no real support. I understand that if difficulties arise we will discuss the matter further with the British, but I do not know whether that will get us very far along the track, bearing in mind the tension existing in the region. It has been stated that if there is any serious breakdown in law and order Australian troops will be withdrawn after appropriate advice to the British Government. I can understand that, but we have to talk about the situation a bit more constructively.

In summary, we would like to see Australia comply more with the wishes of what the guerrilla forces in terms of enforcing the ceasefire and maintaining supervision in the area. We would like to see the British more directly involved, to guarantee some maintenance of law and order. I think the question of sanctions should be delayed until such time as we get some tangible evidence of a solution to the problems in that region.

Mr COHEN:
Robertson

-Mr Deputy Speaker, I congratulate the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Peacock) on the statement but I do not wish to make a statement at this stage. I just want to say that in a way it is a pity that this statement is being brought down on the last day of the sitting because I am sure that many members of Parliament would have loved to have spoken on this matter. Many of them have had a long interest in Rhodesia- southern Africa. It is to be regretted that we will not be able to debate it.

Mr PEACOCK (Kooyong-Minister for Foreign Affairs)- With your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker: I share the regret of the honourable member for Robertson (Mr Cohen) but events are moving in London. We had been holding back until we saw how they were going. I did not want the House to rise without some statement of indication should an agreement be reached while the Parliament is in recess. One would have expected some principles to have been laid down at some stage. I share the honourable member’s regret. I would look for a debate possibly early next year.

Mr Cohen:

– That is what I was going to ask for. I hope that early in the new year we can have a debate on the subject of southern Africa.

Mr PEACOCK:

-I thank the honourable member.

Debate (on motion by Mr Barry Jones) adjourned.

page 3391

BILLS RETURNED FROM THE SENATE

The following Bills were returned from the Senate without amendment or requests:

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 1979-80.

Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 1979-80.

page 3391

GRIEVANCE DEBATE

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jarman:
DEAKIN, VICTORIA

-As it is now past the time provided for the grievance debate, Order of the Day No. 1 will not be called on.

page 3392

GOVERNMENT INITIATED COST INCREASES

Discussion of Matter of Public Importance

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Mr Speaker has received a letter from the honourable member for Adelaide (Mr Hurford) proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The increased burden on Australian families of government initiated cost increases.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

Mr Scholes:

-Mr Deputy Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the House.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Only six members of the Opposition are present.

Mr Scholes:

-Mr Deputy Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the House.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-The proposed discussion lapses.

Mr Scholes:

-Mr Deputy Speaker, may I have your indulgence?

Mr Hurford:

– We have called for a quorum.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-A quorum is called for.

Mr Scholes:

– It was called before you called for members to rise in their places.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-No. I called for members to rise first. ( Quorum formed).

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! According to the daily program, that is, the blue sheet, the report of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence was due to come on before the discussion of a matter of public importance. Although I did call for members to rise in respect of the discussion on a matter of public importance and only six members of the Opposition were present, in deference to the Opposition I will again call for members to rise in their places.

Government members interjecting-

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-I believe this is the only fair way in which the Chair can make a decision in this matter in view of the fact that the presentation of the report of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence was deferred. I think this is only fair to the Opposition, and I intend to adopt that course.

I repeat: Mr Speaker has received a letter from the honourable member for Adelaide (Mr Hurford) proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The increased burden on Austraiian families of government initiated cost increases.

I again call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the Standing Orders having risen in their places-

Mr HURFORD:
Adelaide

-Mr Deputy Speaker -

Motion ( by Mr Ellicott) agreed to:

That the business of the day be called on.

Mr HURFORD (Adelaide)-Mr Deputy Speaker, if I may have your indulgence, the Opposition understands the circumstances of the Government deciding that the House should rise by about S.30 this afternoon and that because of the censure motion the Opposition would not be allowed to discuss this matter of public importance. But we did want to show our sincerity in proposing this matter by being present in the House. In spite of the rather small time attitude of some back benchers who are attempting to interject, the fact is that the order of business set out on the blue sheet was departed from. The blue sheet is put out each sitting day and when a matter listed on that sheet is not to be dealt with in order it is normal courtesy for those who are involved to be informed. That did not happen this time.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! I have already made that point. I do not think it is necessary for the honourable member for Adelaide to make it again.

Mr HURFORD:

– I want to thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for your courtesy in this matter.

page 3392

INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT AMENDMENT BILL (No. 6) 1979

Bill presented by Mr Howard, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr HOWARD:
Treasurer · Bennelong · LP

– I move:

That the Bill be now read a second time.

The Bill that I now bring before the House, together with an associated tax rates Bill, gives legislative form to previously announced changes in the basis of taxing income of trusts and of dependent children. Also included in the Bill are provisions dealing with the taxation value of housing provided to employees by their employers. Previously foreshadowed measures to counter schemes of tax avoidance that seek to exploit the deduction for bad debts are another part of the Bill. The Bill will also confer tax deductions for gifts towards relief efforts in Kampuchea and East Timor.

Let me deal first with the last of these matters. The Government believes that the level of human suffering in Kampuchea and East Timor is such that we should add to Australia’s support by allowing tax deductions for gifts to the appropriate appeals. Accordingly, the special concession of a deduction for gifts of $2 or more will apply to gifts made in the current financial year to the International Disaster Emergencies Committee Kampuchean Relief Appeal and to the Australian Red Cross East Timor Appeal. The response to the appeals so far clearly indicates that the granting of tax deductions has been welcomed throughout Australia.

Honourable members will recall that I announced broad proposals on the taxation of income of trusts and dependent children at some length on 26 July last. After a careful examination of the many responses to this announcement, from individuals and organisations, the Government decided on a number of modifications to eliminate potential anomalies and unintended consequences. Details of these were given in my statement to the House last week. Against that background, I think that I can in this speech confine myself to the main features of the proposed arrangements as reviewed and modified.

Broadly speaking, the new system applicable to income of dependent children will apply to the taxable income, whether derived directly or through trusts, of children under the age of 18 years at the end of the year of income. But there are to be several important exceptions. Thus the new system will not in any way affect children who are married at the end of the year of income or are in full time employment then. There are also to be exclusions for double orphans and handicapped children. These exclusions will, quite properly, keep the income of a large number of children entirely outside the new system. Income not so excluded will, at base, bear tax under the proposed new system. Particular categories of income, whether derived directly or through a trust, will, however, be excluded and will attract tax only according to the tax rules applicable to individuals generally.

Thus, income from deceased estates, or from property left to the child by a deceased person will be outside the new system. So too will income from the investment of other sums coming directly to a child on a person ‘s death, such as the proceeds of a life insurance policy or a lump sum from a superannuation fund. Income from property transferred to a child by another person to whom the property was left by a deceased person, if transferred within three years after the death of that person, will be excluded if within limits set by relevant rules of intestacy. A child in full time employment will, of course, be outside the new system altogether but, as regards a child not categorically excluded in this way, employment income from part time work and income from a business conducted by the child alone or with another minor will both be outside the new system. Income from the investment of compensation paid for damages, for example, for loss of parental support or for personal injury is not to be subject to the new system. Neither is income from funds raised by public appeal for the relief of persons in necessitous circumstances. Income from court-ordered settlements arising as a result of divorce or judicial separation, income from the investment of a child’s lottery winnings and income from the investment of savings out of any of the excluded categories of income make up the balance of the classes of income excluded from the new system.

Experience regrettably having shown that there will always be some who will seek to take unintended advantage of provisions designed, as these exceptions are, to provide relief in particular circumstances, the Bill contains a number of safeguards against exploitation of the exceptions to avoid tax intended to be charged. These safeguarding measures aim to ensure, for example, that profits are not diverted to a child ‘s business by relatives or other persons not at arm’s length, and that income from a child’s investment is not inflated by similar diversions.

Income to which the new system appliestermed in the legislation ‘eligible’ income- will for 1979-80 be taxed at a minimum marginal rate of tax of 47.07 per cent in the hands of the person who is taxable in respect of the income. However, if the eligible income does not exceed $1,040, the special rate will not apply. That means that if the total taxable income does not exceed $3,893 and the eligible income does not exceed $1,040 no tax will be payable. If the eligible income exceeds $1,040, ‘shading-in’ arrangements will apply so that the special rate will not be fully applicable until the eligible income exceeds $3,625. Up to that point the average rate of tax will, of course, be lower than 47.07 per cent. As I have explained previously, if a person has other income as well as eligible income in excess of $ 1,040, the other income will be taxed in the normal way. This means that the zero rate will apply to the first $3,893 of other income, and the standard rate of 33.07 per cent to other income between $3,894 and $16,608.

Trust income to which a child under 18 years of age is, or is deemed to be, presently entitled is already taxable in the trustee’s hands and will be taxed under the new system on the same basis as would apply if the child derived the income directly. This means that, as to trust income to which the new system applies, the trustee will be taxed at the minimum marginal rate of 47.07 per cent, subject to the $1,040 threshold and shading-in arrangements. As to other trust income, the trustee will be taxed at ordinary personal tax rates including the zero rate on income up to $3,893.

As I indicated in my statement on 14 November, the Bill will authorise relief, by way of a rebate of part or all of any increase in tax payable as a result of the new system, in respect of income arising from arrangements entered into on or before 26 July 1979. An applicant for relief will need to establish to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Taxation that the circumstances are such that it would be unreasonable that the whole of the extra tax should be payable. The basis for this relief in the ordinary case where one or both parents have a taxable income is spelt out in the legislation. It is to the effect that a child, or the trustee for a child, will be eligible for a rebate to the extent that the tax otherwise payable on the relevant eligible income is greater than the tax that would have been payable on that income if it had been derived by the parent, or the parent with the higher taxable income. If the child has minor brothers or sisters also in receipt of eligible income, the eligible incomes of all of them will be added to that of the relevant parent in ascertaining how much tax the income would have borne in the parent’s hands. In determining the amount of any rebate under this provision, the fact that a parent’s income has been reduced by artificial tax avoidance arrangements may be taken into account by the Commissioner.

The Government believes that this rebate, together with the specific exceptions and exclusions provided in the Bill, should ensure that application of the new system will operate appropriately. However, to make doubly sure, the Commissioner will be given a discretionary power to allow a rebate of part or all of the extra tax payable as a result of the application of the new system if cases should arise where it is shown to his satisfaction that exaction of the full amount would entail serious hardship. In both of these discretionary areas, the Commissioner’s decision will be open to the usual rights of objection and appeal.

As previously foreshadowed, the Bill will, again with some exceptions, alter the arrangements for taxing accumulating trust income, that is to say, income of a trust to which no beneficiary has, or is deemed to have, a present entitlement. At present, this income is taxed in the trustee’s hands, either at the maximum personal rate of tax or at ordinary personal tax rates but not including, except in relation to the first three years of a deceased estate, the zero rate of tax on the first $3,893 of income. The first change proposed is that a beneficiary who has an indefeasible vested interest in accumulating trust income will be treated as being presently entitled to the income.

Other accumulating trust income will be taxed at the maximum personal tax rate, 6 1.07 per cent for 1979-80. However, subject to rules designed to guard against their exploitation for purposes of tax avoidance, there will be significant exceptions. First, the accumulating income of deceased estates will continue to be taxed as at present; that is, the income will bear ordinary personal rates of tax, including the zero rate for the first three years and will attract the benefit of a minimum taxable income of $417 and associated shading-in arrangements thereafter. Secondly, bankrupt estates, and trusts of moneys received as compensation for a particular event, trusts of moneys payable on the death of a person and funds raised by public appeal for persons in necessitous circumstances, will continue to have accumulating income taxed at ordinary personal rates of tax, without the zero rate but with a $4 1 7 minimum taxable income and associated shading-in arrangements.

As the legislation will not be considered in the Parliament until the autumn sittings, the Government has decided that it would not now be appropriate to impose an obligation on people concerned to pay provisional tax for 1979-80 on the basis of the proposed new arrangements. This decision means that the new arrangements could be seen as having a double effect when assessments on income of the year ending 30 June 1980 are made after the end of the year. These will, of course, show both tax for 1979-80 and provisional tax for 1980-81. Accordingly, taxpayers who wish to avoid this apparent doubling-up effect may do so by applying to have 1979-80 provisional tax varied under the existing self-assessment procedure. The Bill also provides an option for those not otherwise liable to pay provisional tax for 1979-80 to pay that tax on the basis of the new arrangements. I should emphasise at this point that, whilst the Government would be happy to receive representations on technical aspects of the legislation before it is considered in the autumn, we have already given very careful thought to the substance of the trust and related measures. The changes that I announced last week, and which are incorporated in this legislation, represent the Government’s considered response to the representations it has received.

I come now to the subject of employees’ housing. Honourable members may recall that on 13 June 1979, following completion by the Government of its review of the provisions dealing with taxation of the value of housing accommodation provided for employees, I foreshadowed certain changes to those provisions. As I indicated on that occasion, the Government believes that a general provision which brings to account for taxation the value of employee benefits is a necessary part of an effective system of personal taxation. Such a provision must, of course, operate in a practical manner having regard to the many and varied circumstances which it must cover. To assist in that direction, amendments proposed by this Bill will make it clear that the Commissioner of Taxation is to take into account all relevant matters in assessing for income tax purposes the value of any housing accommodation provided to an employee. In particular, the amendments proposed will ensure that, to the extent appropriate in the circumstances, specified matters will be brought into consideration as factors tending to reduce the amount of the taxable benefit.

Remoteness or isolation of the area in which the accommodation is located is one such factor. Any lack of choice by employees in the matter of accommodation and whether occupancy is subject to any onerous conditions imposed on the employee concerned are others. Whether the quality or size of the accommodation provided exceeds the standard of accommodation that the employee would ordinarily seek is another. All these stated factors will ensure that, as far as possible, full account is taken of those circumstances which might ordinarily reduce the value to an employee of housing benefits granted by an employer. To the same effect will be a specific requirement for the Commissioner to take into account whether it is customary in the particular industry for employers to provide free housing for employees or to provide housing at a low rent. This matter is to form part of the valuation criteria because the Government is conscious of long-standing arrangements between employers and employees in some industries under which accommodation is customarily provided either without charge or for a charge less than the fair rental value of the accommodation. These arrangements are common in respect of industry and employment outside the capital cities and in relatively remote or isolated areas of Australia.

The valuation criteria to be expressed in the law are to apply in respect of 1977-78 and subsequent income years. The Bill will authorise amendment of assessments for 1977-78 and 1978-79 made before the Bill comes into operation where the new measures would result in a reduction of the value of housing benefits included in the assessments. Such amendments may be made whether or not the employee has exercised the rights of objection and appeal that the law provides. The backdating to 1977-78 will not, of course, retrospectively create any liability for tax on housing benefits.

Finally, the Bill contains amendments foreshadowed in my statement of 12 June 1979 to counter tax avoidance schemes that exploit the income tax deduction for bad debts. This is done through arrangements under which the loss claimed to be suffered by way of a bad debt is effectively recouped in a non-taxable form. Amendments to provide a counter to tax avoidance schemes of the recoupment type that exploit deductions ordinarily available for expenditure incurred in borrowing money, in discharging a mortgage, in the acquisition of trading stock or by way of interest or rent were foreshadowed in my statements of 24 September 1978 and 1 March 1979. They were approved by the House recently when it considered the Income Tax Assessment Amendment Bill (No. 4) 1979. The amendments now proposed will extend the operation of those provisions so that they apply also to bad debt schemes.

Reflecting my statement of 12 June, the amendments will mean that a deduction will not be allowable for a bad debt where the debt is incurred in respect of a loan made after 24 September 1978 as part of a tax avoidance arrangement entered into after that date. For the amendments to apply it will be necessary that the arrangement involves the receipt by the taxpayer or an associate of a compensatory benefit the value of which, when added to the tax benefit sought in respect of the bad debt, would effectively recoup the taxpayer for the loss incurred in respect of the loan so that no real loss is suffered.

Mr Deputy Speaker, you will note that the amendments proposed by this Bill are to apply to loans made after 24 September 1978. This is the date on which the Government’s intention to act against recoupment arrangements was originally announced and is in accord with the warning I gave at that time that, if further recoupment schemes were to emerge, the Government would, with effect from that day, act against them as outlined in that announcement.

My statement of 1 March 1979 with respect to schemes of this type entered into to exploit the deductions for borrowing expenses was an earnest of the Government’s intention in this regard. Despite that, the bad debt schemes emerged and it has again been necessary to act. I trust that by now the Government’s determination to put an end to these schemes in which taxpayers seek deductions for losses or outgoings which, in a practical sense, they do not bear is clear both to those promoting the schemes and to taxpayers contemplating paying fees to promoters for access to deductions under such schemes. However, should this still not be the case, I repeat again that the Government will not hesitate to amend the income tax law to counter any other schemes exhibiting similar features and with effect from 24 September 1978.

I also announced on 12 June that losses generated by bad debt schemes would not be permitted to be carried forward for deduction into a future income year. This is in accord with the policy of the Government announced on 24 May 1979 that paper losses produced by tax avoidance schemes, including recoupment schemes, are not to be allowed to be carried forward as income tax deductions. The amendments proposed will mean that losses created by bad debt schemes in 1 977-78 or earlier years will not be allowed as carry-forward deductions in 1978- 79 or in subsequent income years, while such losses manufactured in the 1978-79 income year will not be deductible against income of 1979- 80 or subsequent years. As is usual, the technical features of the Bill are dealt with in an explanatory memorandum. Copies of the memorandum are not yet available, but will be provided to honourable members within the next few days. I commend the Bill to the House.

Debate (on motion by Mr Willis) adjourned.

page 3396

INCOME TAX (RATES) AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2) 1979

Bill presented by Mr Howard, and read a first time.

Second Reading

Mr HOWARD:
Treasurer · Bennelong · LP

– I move:

That the Bill be now read a second time.

This Bill will amend the Income Tax (Rates) Act 1976, which declares the rates of tax payable by individuals and trustees. Its purpose is to declare the rates of tax payable on income of dependent children, and trustees for them, that comes within the scope of the new system for taxing such income proposed in the Bill that I have just introduced. In speaking to that Bill, I mentioned that the income in question is to attract a minimum tax rate for 1979-80 of 47.07 per cent. That rate is declared in this Bill, which also provides for the special tax threshold of $1,040 that is to be available. Full details of technical aspects of the Bill are contained in an explanatory memorandum that will be made available shortly.

I should perhaps add that it will not be necessary to amend the Income Tax (Rates) Act to give effect to the changes I have announced in the rates of tax applicable to income of trusts to which no beneficiary is presently entitled. Because of the structure of the relevant legislation those changes will flow from amendments being made to relevant provisions of the Assessment Act.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Debate (on motion by Mr Willis) adjourned.

page 3396

CONSTRUCTION OF HOLSWORTHY ARMY DEVELOPMENT

Reference to Public Works Committee

Mr ELLICOTT:
Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for the Capital Territory · Wentworth · LP

– I move:

That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, the following proposed work be referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works for consideration and report: Construction of Holsworthy Army Development, Stage 2.

The proposal is for the provision of permanent working facilities and associated engineering services for Army units at Holsworthy. The works proposed include: Headquarters, administrative, storage and workshop facilities and gun parks for the 8/ 12th Medium Regiment; military instruction block; warehouse and administrative facilities for 1 Field Supply Company, including covered vehicle shelters; administrative, storage and workshop facilities for 104 Signals Squadron, including covered vehicle shelters; storage facilities for 2 Reconnaissance Regiment; barracks administration building; task force headquarters; and parade ground, roads and car parks. The estimated cost of the proposal at October 1979 prices is $ 10.3m. I table drawings of the proposed works.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 3397

AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY AMENDMENT BILL 1979

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 20 November, on motion by Mr Staley:

That the Bill be now read a second time.

Mr ELLICOTT:
Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for the Capital Territory · Wentworth · LP

- Mr Deputy Speaker, may I have your indulgence to suggest that the House has a general debate covering this Bill and the Canberra College of Advanced Education Amendment Bill 1979 as they are related measures. Separate questions will, of course, be put on each of the Bills at the conclusion of the debate.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jarman:

-Is it the wish of the House to have a general debate covering the two measures? There being no objection, I will allow that course to be followed.

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

-May I begin by saying that I have always had a peculiar objection to the kind of rubric that is used to introduce the interaction of a cognate debate. I have always preferred the formula used in the Senate, where the Minister says: ‘I suggest that the second reading of these two Bills be debated cognately’. In this House Ministers always inject an element of surprise, as though the idea of a cognate debate had just occurred to them in a great moment of inspiration. These are objectionable Bills, obnoxious in principle and practice, and they ought to be opposed vigorously. The Bills were discussed at some length in another place on 15 November, when seven senators took part in the debate. Unfortunately, exigencies of time on this last day of sitting will prevent the Bills being discussed at length in this place. By arrangement, I understand that I will be the only speaker on the Bills. I assure the House that I will not take my full 30 minutes.

The main purpose of both Bills, the Australian National University Amendment Bill and the Canberra College of Advanced Education Amendment Bill, although it is not obvious from reading the clauses of the Bills, is to dismember and destroy the Australian Union of Students. This is a remarkable example of extreme partisanship, showing how a small sectional group with strong influence within the Liberal Party has been able to exert quite illegitimate pressure on the Government to introduce legislation. In 1 977 the Council of the Australian National University adopted new fee rules which provided for exemption from compulsory membership of and payment of fees to approved student bodies and gave rights of appeal to any students dissatisfied with decisions on these issues. However, this did not go far enough for the youthful Liberal enthusiasts who wanted to attack and destroy university autonomy.

The objectionable clauses in the Bills are clauses 16 and 19 of the Australian National University Amendment Bill and clauses 5 and 6 of the Canberra College of Advanced Education Amendment Bill, which are virtually identical in wording. The clauses tie the hands of the Australian National University Council and the Canberra College of Advanced Education Council by providing that moneys collected by way of fees shall not be made available to any student organisation- the Australian Union of Students is not actually named at this stage- unless ‘the Council is satisfied that the governing body of the organisation is representative of the members of the organisation’; and by providing that Councils may not pass statutes to authorise expenditure on ‘amenities or services that are not of an academic nature’ unless the provision of these amenities will directly benefit the University, the College of Advanced Education or its students, or promote sporting, recreational, educational, social, cultural or post-graduate interests. In other words, funds can be applied only for non-political purposes, using that term in the narrowest sense.

Let us suppose that the Australian Union of Students tried to organise a Kampuchean relief fund or an East Timorese relief fund. Let us suppose it tried to raise funds for Amnesty International, to mention an organisation in which I know you are interested, Mr Deputy Speaker. Under this miserable Act, the councils of the ANU and the CCAE would have no power to do that, even though there might be a very strong consensus of support. They simply would have no choice. It is striking, for example, that clause 19 of the Australian National University Amendment Bill and clause 5 of the Canberra College of Advanced Education Amendment Bill provide that membership of student unions should not be compulsory. This is an extraordinary example of a piece of legislation which is both superfluous and offensive, because the existing rules of the Australian National University provide that membership of student unions should not be compulsory. Fifteen per cent of the student membership at the ANU is not in the Australian Union of Students. What has really happened is that Government has said: ‘No, but they might change their minds. We do not propose to allow the Council of that University to be able to exercise its own judgment as to what it thinks ought to be done. We will make the provision for them in this piece of legislation’. I might say that that is totally contradictory in some ways to the overall objective of the legislation.

The criticism of the AUS, and it is criticism that might have had a good deal more validity two or three years ago and is less valid now, is that it did not have enough people actively involved in student unions and in voting for the Australian Union of Students. The Government is saying: ‘We have a master stroke. We have a wonderful way of resolving that problem. We will cut out compulsory membership of student unions’. Inevitably that will have the effect of reducing the number of people who are likely to want to vote in student union elections.

The opponents of the AUS claim that the organisation is unrepresentative, and there is no doubt that in recent years it has had a very bumpy record. From time to time various university student groups have withdrawn from AUS. In the case of my own alma mater, Melbourne University, it ceded some years ago and then returned this year when 65 per cent of all students voted to go back into the AUS. Sydney University was another university which withdrew at one stage. Each withdrawal has necessarily made the AUS less, not more, representative. That is axiomatic. As a general principle, I believe that there ought to be a nationwide coalition of student unions. Like Voltaire’s God, if there was not an Australian Union of Students it would be necessary to invent one. If students or Ministers research officers do not like the AUS, its leaders or its policies, surely the way to solve that problem is to mobilise for political changes within the organisation. If AUS is thought to be unrepresentative, the answer is to make it more representative, to get more of our 250,000 university students to participate, to run for election, to vote, to argue, and to propose new policies. I would have thought that this is a classic example of a Liberal point of view. It dates back as far as 1 976 when somebody replied to critics who felt that there ought to be more coercive action against student organisations. That person wrote:

I share the concern of your members that any student body should promote international terrorism and antizionism. These are wholly non-Australian and they are evil concepts.

However, as within the trade union movement, the cure must originate basically from the members themselves. It is within the students ‘ unions to rectify the matter.

It is an important problem and I would be happy to discuss it further. In other days I have participated- successfully too- in the marshalling of student ideas and energies towards the democratic process.

Again, the same writer stated: in many . . . cases the fault lies with the failure of the general student body to participate in the election of office bearers and in the general critical comment of the actions of the office bearers throughout the year. If there is to be an elected body of any sort its success or failure will depend fairly heavily upon student participation.

You would agree with those views, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am sure that the Minister for Finance (Mr Eric Robinson) would also agree with them. He nods assent. They were, of course, stated by Senator Carrick, the Minister for Education, who originated this miserable Bill. Rather, he responded to pressure and introduced this miserable Bill. That is the correct way to do it. The worst way, the method adopted in this Bill, is to destroy the AUS, to make it less representative by interfering with the tradition of academic freedom and to prohibit the councils of tertiary institutions from enabling fees to be paid except for very narrow- one might say, almost selfishpurposes confined to ‘student welfare’, narrowly defined. To give a political analogy, it is as though the Fraser Government decided that it could not win a free election in 1980 against the Australian Labor Party and that the best way to secure its political future would be to pass legislation prohibiting trade unions from making financial contributions to the Labor Party, but by exclusion encouraging trade unions to provide political sustenance to other smaller left wing parties to the extreme. That is a perfect analogy of what this miserable legislation is doing.

If AUS leadership is to be changed, it ought to be left to the students to do it. If enough people vote in elections this will happen. There is a good deal of strong evidence to indicate that there have been very striking changes in the AUS. Curiously, this legislation is really about two years too late to deal with the situation with which it purports to deal. If reasonable campuses disaffiliate, the AUS must inevitably fall under more extreme influence. This, of course, could come from the Right or from the Left. Mr Deputy Speaker, I move:

That all words after ‘That’ be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: the Bill be withdrawn and redrafted to exclude all those provisions relating to student fees and organisations ‘.

We believe that one of the most objectionable aspects of this Bill is the way in which the Government has stood over the Australian National University. I shall just quote what the Vice Chancellor of the University said recently. He stated:

The Government’s announcement in mid-year was the first time that can be recalled when a government had announced specific proposals for changes in the University’s Act before discussing these with the University itself. The University is dismayed at this proceeding, not only because of the absence of consultation on this point but also because the Government’s announcement marks a serious departure from the principle that the governing body of the University should have full responsibility for the determination of policies devised under broad guidelines provided by its Act.

In order to speed up the process of this legislation I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard item 1 5 of the minutes of the Australian National University Council of 9 November 1979. It relates to the determination of the ANU Students Association payment of outstanding affiliation fees to the Australian Union of Students.

Leave granted.

The document read as follows-

Item15- ANU Students’ Association- Payment of Outstanding Affiliation Fees to the Australian Union of Students

a ) Payment of Outstanding 1977-78 Fees:

It was noted that the Standing Committee of Council in its consideration of this matter on 12 October 1979 had been satisfied, through the investigations of the General Services Fee Advisory Committee, that there was a liability on the part of the Students’ Association to pay to the Australian Union of Students the 1977 and 1978 outstanding fees, and that the legal impediment to payment that had stood during 1977 and 1978 had now been removed.

In discussion it was suggested that the only test of a legal obligation was whether the Australian Union of Students was competent to sue the Students’ Association and to succeed in that suit.

It was resolved to approve, that in the context in which the Students’ Association manages its own affairs, the Association be permitted to use the sum of $5,224.81 from pre- 1 979 fees received in 1979 and the sum of $1,934.44 towards the payment of outstanding 1977-78 Australian Union of Students fees of $ 1 6, 1 25.84.

Payment of 1979 Fee:

It was noted that the Standing Committee of Council at its meeting on 12 October 1979 had referred to the Council Tor consideration the matter of whether the Students* Association should be permitted to pay to the Australian Union of Students the Association’s affiliation fee for 1979 from the 1979 General Services Fee money.

It was further noted that the Chancellor had received a letter dated 24 October 1979 from the Minister for Education concerning the ANU Amendment Bill 1979. The Minister had observed, in part, that that section of the Amendment Act dealing with compulsory fees and student organisations had, at the University’s suggestion, been made effective from 1 January 1980. The Minister asked that, as the Bill would not be effective until 1980, the University follow the Government’s policy as reflected in the Bill in the application of compulsory fees collected in respect of 1979.

The Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor assured the Council that no undertaking had been given to the Department of Education or to the Minister that the University would treat the disposition of the 1 979 fee in accordance with the prospective provisions of the Government’s amendments to the ANU Act.

The following documents were received: 3029/1979-Paper by the President, ANU Students’ Association on the payment of Australian Union of Students affiliation fees by student organisations. 3098/1979-Copy of a letter dated 24 October 1979 from the Minister for Education to the Chancellor on Amendments to the ANU Act. 3099/1979-Copy of a letter dated 26 October 1979 from the Chancellor to the Minister for Education in reply to the Minister’s letter. 3032/1979-Paper dated I November 1979 by the Assistant Vice-Chancellor on the Bill for an Australian National University Amendment Act 1979.

Copy of the Second Reading Speech by the Minister for Education on the Australian National University Amendment Bill 1979.

Copy of News Information Release dated 25 October 1979-Statement by the Vice-Chancellor on Australian National University Amendment Bill 1 979.

It was noted from the Vice-Chancellor’s statement that under the terms of the Bill the University would be prevented from distributing money from the General Services Fee other than for the provision to students of those amenities and services that are not of an academic nature and that are declared by University statute to be amenities or services that are of direct benefit to the University. The Council of the University would be given discretion to approve payments for these purposes to national bodies concerned with sporting activities, to bodies with objectives similar to that which represents Australian university law students, and to a national body representing postgraduate students. However the terms of the Bill would deny to the Council any discretion to approve payments from compulsorily collected fees to a national body representing students in a more general way even where the national body provided particular amenities and services of a non-academic kind which would clearly be of direct benefit to the University and its students.

In discussion the following comments were made:

the Standing Committee of Council had been satisfied that the ANU Students’ Association had a liability to pay outstanding affiliation fees to the Australian Union of Students;

the matter of the payment of the 1979 affiliation fee by the Students’ Association to the Australian Union of Students should be treated on its own merits and should be decided by the Council without regard to the impending University legislation and the Minister’s request;

3 ) that there was an obligation on the Council to defer a decision on the matter until the final form of the legislation was known and the legislative process completed. A decision on whether the University should apply the legislation retrospectively could then be taken;

the General Services Fee Statute made by Council on 2 February 1979 which the Governor-General had declined to sign, had set out Council ‘s views on the allocation of the General Services Fee. That expressed policy should be taken into account before any decision was made by Council in respect of the Students’ Association’s 1979 affiliation fee to the Australian Union of Students;

5 ) it was not possible for the Council to make a decision at this meeting in terms of its own preferred principles because it would require the Council to make certain judgments as to whether certain student activities would comply with the purposes of the proposedstatute on amenities;

the Council should not allow the Minister’s views to affect its consideration of the matter unless the University was in breach of some undertaking, implied or express, in the matter;

7 ) the Students ‘ Association, as a responsible body, had accorded with Council’s direction that no payments be made without Council’s express approval to the Australian Union of Students from 1979 General Services Fees money. The Association had set aside the sum necessary to pay the 1979 AUS affiliation fee and it had done this on the assumption that the Council would by now have made a decision in the matter. The Association was concerned about its financial obligation to the Australian Union of Students which it had contracted before the Council had determined its 1 979 fees policy. It considered it should be allowed to honour its commitment to the Australian Union of Students;

8 ) the Council while directing the Students ‘ Association to refrain from paying affiliation fees to the Australian Union of Students from the 1979 General Services Fee had not requested the Students ‘ Association to test the attitude of its members to the question of affiliation to the AUS and had not asked the Students’ Association to refrain from accepting AUS benefits flowing from the Association’s affiliation with that organisation. Before any decision was reached the Council should investigate whether the amenities and services provided by the Australian Union of Students to affiliates were acceptable to the University under the principles established by Council ‘s General Services Fee Advisory Committee relating to recognised student bodies within the University.

It was resolved:

1 ) to rescind any extant resolution that would prevent the Council from authorising payment of moneys collected from the General Services Fee in 1979 to the Australian Union of Students;

to request the General Services Fee Advisory Committee, using the principles it had applied already in relation to advice to Council concerning distribution of that fee to recognised student bodies within the University, to advise Standing Committee what payment if any the University should permit those organisations to make from that fee for the purpose of affiliation with the Australian Union of Students;

that in relation to resolution (2) above, the Council authorise the Standing Committee of Council to act for it;

to endorse the views of the Vice-Chancellor as expressed in his Information Release, and the Chancellor in his letter to the Minister for Education.

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

-I thank the House. I conclude by pointing out that the genesis of this Bill seems to be from Mr Michael Yabsley who has an interesting record. He is ex-vice chairman of the Australian Students Liberal Federation and a former research officer for Senator Knight. He is now operating on a higher plane as private secretary to the Minister for Housing and Construction (Mr Groom). He is a vigorous advocate for the Republic of South Africa. In an article on the AUS in the National Student of October 1 978 he wrote:

Liberal students are the unblushing assassins of AUS.

It is also known that among those organising the campaign have been the Uranium Producers Forum and the Liberal Party organisation itself.

I think this is a deplorable piece of legislation. It is notorious that student bodies are capable of great variations so far as political philosophies are concerned. There is nothing wrong with that. We would not want them to be locked into positions. Among the revolutionaries who have been thrown up by the Australian Union of Students and its predecessor, the National Union of Australian University Students- for obvious reasons, it could never have had the initials of the Australian National Union of Students- was that terrible revolutionary, Senator Peter Durack, the Attorney-General, who is a former president! He no doubt has passed through the revolutionary phase and is now an impeccable conservative. I believe that this is a bad Bill. The Opposition does not propose to force the issue to a division but we want to indicate our very vigorous opposition and, of course, our support for our amendment. It is unlikely that our amendment will be defeated -it might be a pretty close call- judging by the numbers in the chamber at the moment. We strongly oppose the Bill.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Drummond:
FORREST, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

-Is the amendment seconded?

Dr Blewett:

– I second the motion, Mr Deputy Speaker.

Mr SHACK:
Tangney

– I rise to speak very briefly in support of the Bills and to oppose the amendment which has been moved by the Opposition in relation to the Canberra College of Advanced Education Amendment Bill. I do not think that I have ever had as much interest shown in a speech as is being shown in the House this afternoon. Everybody is interested to know when I will finish. There are just a couple of things that I would like to say on this legislation. The honourable member for Lalor (Mr Barry Jones) tried to pin this legislation as an attack on the Australian Union of Students. Let us be quite clear about this. The thrust of these two Bills - the Australian National University Amendment Bill and the Canberra College of Advanced Education Amendment Bill- represents the Federal Government’s response to the problems of compulsory membership of student organisations, so-called student unionism, and the unrepresentative use of student funds from those campuses for which the Federal Government has some sort of legislative responsibility. The legislation seeks to safeguard the very important principle of freedom of association and, equally important, freedom of non-association.

I do not have time to detail the whole of the history which has given rise to this legislation, but I think two major historical facts need to be remembered. They have largely contributed to the need for this sort of Bill. The first is the channelling of compulsory student funds by unrepresentative student organisations to every conceivable ratbag minority cause in the country and overseas. The second fact is that in the past there has been a denial of student status and student rights by some university administrations around the country to those students who refused to pay the compulsory student union levy. We are safeguarding those students, a protection that I certainly did not enjoy when I was at the campus of the University of Western Australia.

We have heard the Opposition contribution. I want to contrast that furphy with the facts of the legislation. It is to safeguard students’ rights. Let us just remind ourselves of the main provision in the legislation. Membership of student organisations will be voluntary. Fees payable in respect of membership of a student organisation will also be voluntary. No student will be penalised for not joining. That is a right which was not enjoyed by all students in the past. Compulsory fees can be used only for the provision of amenities or services. Where it is the case that the council of a university makes compulsory fee money available to a student organisation for the provision by that organisation of approved amenities or services, the council must firstly satisfy itself that the governing body of that organisation is representative of its members. When paid, such moneys will be for the provision of amenities and services which will directly benefit the university. Moneys will not be paid to any national organisation unless the council is satisfied that it is encouraging students’ sporting and recreational activities, promoting student interests in some other particular educational, cultural or social field, or promoting the interests of post-graduate students.

There is also going to be accountability in terms of the disposal of that money with details of receipts and expenditures. In summary, we have a legislative package which I believe takes a very small step along the important road of providing for the introduction of the principles of voluntary association and academic freedom. We are talking about the principles of voluntary association; simply that means the freedom to join or not to join. If one decides not to join, one is not to be penalised for that decision. It is the freedom to pay money to an organisation one supports. Any student in any tertiary institution in this capital can still belong to Australian

Union of Students or any other organisation, but this legislation goes one step further in that it provides for the freedom not to join and not to pay that money, and importantly, not to be penalised for that decision. Therefore, I find it absolutely incredible, when we are talking about such basic freedoms, that we are encountering the opposition that we have had this afternoon and that we had in the chamber only last week. I strongly support the legislation and I trust the House will oppose the amendment.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Drummond:

The question is: That the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question. Those of that opinion say aye, to the contrary, no. I think the ayes have it.

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

– I think the noes have it, but in the circumstances we will not press for a division.

Amendment negatived.

Original question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

Third Reading

Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.

Bill (on motion by Mr Nixon) read a third time.

page 3401

CANBERRA COLLEGE OF ADVANCED EDUCATION AMENDMENT BILL 1979

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 20 November, on motion by Mr Staley:

That the Bill be now read a second time.

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

– I move:

That all words after ‘That’ be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: the Bill be withdrawn and redrafted to exclude all those provisions relating to student fees and organisations ‘.

Mr Morris:

– I second the amendment.

Amendment negatived.

Original question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

Third Reading

Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.

Bill (on motion by Mr Nixon) read a third time.

page 3402

REDEVELOPMENT OF BRISBANE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

Approval of Work: Public Works Committee Act

Mr NIXON:
Minister for Transport · Gippsland · NCP/NP

– I move:

The proposal referred to the Committee for investigation and report is for the construction of the initial works associated with the proposed redevelopment of Brisbane International Airport to the north-east of the existing Airport. The initial works include reclamation of the site with sand filling dredged from Moreton Bay to accommodate the proposed new runway, taxiways, apron, building areas and roadways; the construction of a floodway channel to divert the flood waters presently discharging across the site; the construction of a 3,500-metre runway and associated taxiway system; and other associated engineering preparatory works. The estimated cost of the proposal when examined by the Committee was $98m at July 1979 prices.

The balance of the works required to complete phase 1 involves the provision of additional facilities such as domestic terminal buildings, aprons, control tower, access roads, car parks and navigational aids and system at an additional cost of approximately $74m based on July 1979 prices. In reporting on the proposed works, the Committee has drawn a number of conclusions and made a number of recommendations which the Government has considered. The Committee in its report has agreed that the proposed concept for redevelopment of Brisbane International Airport is satisfactory, that the site is suitable and that the general scope of the initial works of phase 1 is necessary for the redevelopment. However, the Committee recommends that commencement of the proposed works be deferred until at least 1986 and that in the meantime the present runway be extended for international services and the Ansett Airlines of Australia and Trans-Australia Airways terminals be expanded by those airlines.

It is normal procedure for government decisions on major investments in public works to be justified in full cost/benefit economic analysis. In the case of this project this analysis was carried out by the Bureau of Transport Economics, and subsequently reviewed by the Department of Transport in the light of the latest information available. In fact, the analysis and recent review compared the proposals referred to the Committee with an alternative similar to that now recommended by the Committee. The review concluded that there is no economic penalty in proceeding with the redevedopment immediately by comparison with delaying it and making interim improvements to the existing airport. The Committee has not challenged this analysis. Furthermore, the review brought out unquantified benefits which would support a decision to proceed now. These benefits include the virtual removal of significant noise nuisance to some 10,000 residents near the airport, the elimination of current building heights restrictions, and the reduction of the cost of air traffic delays. In short the Committee appears to have based its recommendations on minimising short term government capital expenditure without due regard to the full economic considerations in the longer term. Turning now to the Committee’s specific recommendations and conclusions I make the following comments: Firstly, based on the range of forecasts for aircraft movements until the 1990s, which is well within the capacity of the existing main runway, the Committee considers that a need has not been established for the immediate development of the proposed 02/20 runway. The Department of Transport stated in evidence that the proposed new runway was not required to provide early additional runway capacity. However, the Government is confident of the continued growth of Brisbane and Queensland generally. It believes that long term forecasts, such as prepared by the Department, reflect more accurately the growth prospects for aviation at Brisbane than do the predictions submitted by the domestic airlines to the Committee, apparently based on fairly recent trends, and that these long term forecasts are more appropriate for decision-making purposes.

Secondly, the Committee does not accept that the total elimination of the curfew at the present time at Brisbane Airport will generally provide any significant benefit to the users of passengers or freight services. Thirdly, the Committee considers that the building height restrictions within the Brisbane Central Business District are not, of themselves, sufficient reason to advance the requirement for the proposed work at this time. Fourthly, the Committee recognises the noise problem in certain Brisbane residential suburbs and agrees that eventual redevelopment of Brisbane Airport should remove or reduce this nuisance. The current noise problem is not, in itself, sufficient reason to redevelop the airport immediately. The evidence from the Department of Transport did not suggest that any one of these individual benefits on its own justified the proposed redevelopment. However, in aggregate they are complementary to the economic analysis and offer significant benefits in support of the proposal. In particular, the Government believes that the opportunity to alleviate noise nuisance to a substantial number of people should not be passed over.

Fifthly, the Committee accepts that upgrading of current domestic terminal facilities is warranted and should be permitted as proposed by Trans-Australia Airlines and Ansett Airlines of Australia. The cost of upgrading required to meet demand until 1992 would be considerably higher than the domestic airlines have recently contemplated. Inevitably, these costs will be reflected into airline fares in due course. In any case the Department’s investigations show that the ultimate capacity of the present total domestic terminal area, regardless of improvements made in the meantime, will not suffice for the period contemplated by the Committee.

Sixthly, the Committee recommends the extension of the existing 04/22 runway to the north-east by approximately 300 metres be considered an interim measure to enable greater utilisation of Brisbane Airport by international operators. This recommendation relies on paragraph 113 of the Committee’s report which conflicts with advice obtained recently by the Department from Qantas Airways Ltd. The Government will further investigate this aspect to determine whether there is need to review the required length of the proposed new runway.

Seventhly, the Committee agrees that the proposed concept for the ultimate redevelopment of Brisbane Airport is satisfactory. Eighthly, the site, to the north east of the existing airport, is considered suitable for the redevelopment of Brisbane Airport. Ninthly, the Committee agrees that the general scope of the initial works of phase 1 are necessary for the ultimate redevelopment of Brisbane Airport. I have already noted the Committee’s acceptance of these aspects of the proposals of the Department of Transport. Tenthly, a new international terminal building should be included in phase 1 works.

The Department of Transport is satisfied that, subject to appropriate operating procedures, the interim use of the present international terminal would not be prejudicial to safety. However, the Government will give further consideration to the Committee’s recommendation.

Eleventhly, as it has not been effectively demonstrated to the Committee that the proposed redevelopment deserves high national priority, the increases in domestic and international air fares that will result from full cost recovery of the project are considered premature. Because of the variables involved it is premature to draw any firm conclusions on the effects of the cost of this project on air fares beyond the general conclusion that they would not be substantial. In any event, the Government has already recognised a need for special consideration to be given to cost recovery aspects of this project, and this will be done at a very early date. Twelfthly, the Committee recommends that the commencement of the works proposed in this reference be deferred until at least 1986, and recommends for consideration the works set out in paragraphs 103 to 116, which it believes will enable the current facilities to meet Brisbane’s major airport needs to the year 1 992.

For reasons which are apparent from my comments on other recommendations, the Government does not accept that the proposed works should be deferred. Deferral is not supported by the economic analysis which establishes that there is no overall economic penalty in proceeding immediately with this project. The Government believes that there are real and substantial community benefits to be derived from proceeding without delay to the redevelopment of Brisbane Airport in a manner which will provide an adequate base for future improvements to meet the long term needs of Brisbane. Upon the concurrence of the House in this resolution, detailed planning of the work referred to the Committee can proceed having regard to the comments contained in this resolution. The Government desires to thank the Committee for its thorough consideration of this large complex project.

Mr MORRIS:
Shortland

-At the outset, I register my strong protest at the indecent way in which this very important motion is being rushed through the House and the indecent manner in which the report of the Committee -

Mr Lusher:

– Stop being sanctimonious.

Mr MORRIS:

– I am not being sanctimonious. We are sent here to discuss matters -

Mr Lusher:

– Of course you are.

Mr MORRIS:

-Crawl back down into your burrow.

Mr Lusher:

– I object to that comment. Make him withdraw.

Mr MORRIS:

– Eskimoes live in the best kinds of burrows. If the honourable member is upset, I do not mind withdrawing for him. The Opposition supports the motion. However, my colleague, the honourable member for Griffith (Mr Humphreys) has some special personal views in relation to the location of runways that has been suggested in the recommendations of the report. He will deal with those himself. At this stage, the Opposition is completely opposed to any suggestion for a total abolition of the curfew, and, on existing technology for aircraft engine design, it is a matter that we will look at when the time arrives. The Opposition takes considerable pride from the fact that, contrary to some of the claims made by honourable members opposite, it initiated the land acquisition program and acquired the first land for the new airport site. In referring to the cost -

Mr Kevin Cairns:

– Listen to the other comments I will make after your speech.

Mr MORRIS:

-Don’t you say anything. You are the man who said that more than $70m was an absolute waste. You are on record as saying that. Do not start interjecting.

Mr Kevin Cairns:

– Just wait until I deal with you.

Mr MORRIS:

– You said that more than $70m is an absolute waste. Mr Deputy Speaker, I return to the more important subject. The overall cost of the project is estimated at $172m. In January 1979, the Queensland Director of the Department of Transport estimated the cost of the total project at $l50m at 1977 prices. The point that the Opposition wants to make is that this is a major item of expenditure. In two years, the estimate of costs has risen already by some 15 per cent- not one sod has yet been turnedfrom $ 1 50m to $ 1 72m. There will need to be absolute stringency and control over construction, design standards, and the quality of fitments that go into the whole project. Can I make this one point as strongly as I can on behalf of the people who will use the airport and will pay for the airport. Airports ought to be functional. They ought to be utilitarian. But they ought not be monumental. It is not the province of a Minister for Transport, or a government, to erect a Taj Mahal at an airport for which air travellers forever have to pay.

Mr Nixon:

– What happened to Newcastle?

Mr MORRIS:

– That is a utilitarian, conservative type of airport terminal and was a credit to the Minister at that time. In the report of the Public Works Commission, the point is made that on the information provided to the Committee there will be a cost to each international air traveller of $1.30 directly attributable to the cost of this development. The cost to domestic passengers will be $2.10 each. These are large amounts considered in the context of the total air fare and as an addition to the cost recovery component of domestic air fares.

In his statement to the Parliament, the Minister for Transport (Mr Nixon) said that special consideration is to be given to the cost recovery aspect of this project. On behalf of the people who use aircraft, I ask him to provide that information as soon as possible. If it is a scheme that can be used elsewhere, we ought to know about it. I have expressed my view in respect of the Opposition’s attitude towards the curfew. It is dealt with in the report of the Committee. The valid clauses are referred to, particularly in clause 70 and 72, and the Committee’s conclusion is in paragraph 73.

On behalf of the Committee, I say that this is a detailed and very expensive project. The report was tabled yesterday. Obviously the Government has worked all night and has given detailed consideration and analysis to the content of the report, the priority of expenditure and the justification for that expenditure, and it has come up with a pre-printed document this afternoon. This makes a farce of the work of the standing committees of this Parliament. We know that the project is urgent. But the Government could have come back within a reasonable time- say within four years- after it had considered the work of the Committee. I ask honourable members to go through the statement of the Minister when they have the time to do so. I say this on a bipartisan basis: Go through the statement of the Minister and look closely at the response to each of the recommendations of the Committee. The responses are an insult. The Government has rejected the evidence given to the Committee by the Department of Transport. Its own advice to the Minister for Transport, who is sitting at the table, is rejected. A little later on -

Mr Kevin Cairns:

– Don’t be personal.

Mr MORRIS:

-I am pointing to the table. Later on in the report the evidence given by the airlines is rejected by the Government. The conclusion drawn by the Committee in the paragraph on the extension of existing runways is rejected by the Government. I am not saying that these are the wrong conclusions. What I am saying is that better consideration should have been given to the matter and a much better argued case should have been presented. The Parliament is being treated as being totally irrelevant. I conclude with those remarks because I want to allow my colleagues time to speak on the matter. The Opposition supports the motion but it rejects the proposals to abolish the curfew at Brisbane airport.

Mr BUNGEY:
Canning

– I speak on this matter as the Chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works. I wish to respond to some points made in the statement made today by the Minister for Transport (Mr Nixon). I want to refer in particular to several areas in relation to which the advice he has outlined in his statement today varies substantially from the advice that his Department gave to the Committee. Firstly, the Committee was concerned with short term considerations, especially the rise in air fares. The Minister has told us today that special consideration will be given to the cost recovery factor in relation to Brisbane airport. The Committee welcomes this move because, in the Committee’s view, when money is spent on facilities before they are needed and when this cost is charged to air travellers, some special provision should be made. The very fact that the Government acknowledges that it has to do this in the case of Brisbane airport, I think to some extent acknowledges the very point made by the Committee, namely, that the expenditure is premature.

In the very limited time available to me if I am to allow other honourable members to speak, I wish to point out some of the inaccuracies in the statement and where these conflict with some of the evidence presented to the Committee. Let me deal, firstly, with the matter of the taxi-ing distance to the international terminal. It is quite clear from the evidence of the Air Pilots Guild of Australia and from Qantas Airways Ltd that there was a substantial element of danger in any taxi-ing distance greater than 5 kilometres. Aircraft could taxi for such distances with slower taxi-ing rates and the like, but there would have to be some reason for it, such as in the case of an abortive take-off.

Secondly, I come to the matter of cost recovery. The Committee was very concerned about this matter because we heard a lot of evidence to the effect that there were substantial needs in airports in other areas. The situation could be summarised in many ways. I could quote the actual evidence that was given. For instance, even the Department of Transport acknowledged that Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport was saturated and that something had to be done, but that the solution would be very costly. The air pilots see the length of the runway at the Adelaide airport as presenting the biggest danger. It says that that has to be lengthened. Qantas and some of the other airlines see the needs of the airports at Perth, Darwin, Sydney and Adelaide and even Canberra as being more compelling than those of Brisbane. They put forward their submissions along that line.

The Committee could not get from the Department of Transport a list of priorities of works to be carried out by the Department over a period. It seemed to the Committee that the Department was adopting a piecemeal approachdoing one thing at a time- and that we would have to look at the effect of that approach on the cost recovery program and air fares. It is quite clear that if the works at Brisbane airport go ahead, as the Government is now proposing, there will be an increase in air fares of at least 4 per cent solely to cover the cost of that project, unless special provisions are made in relation to cost recovery. When the cost of that project is added to the cost of other projects that are proposed, such as those at Canberra and Sydney and those which are badly needed in a number of other areas, we see that there is a requirement for cost recovery positions. The Minister’s statement referred to the capacity of the current terminals. He said:

In any case the Department’s investigations show that ultimate capacity of the present total domestic terminal area complex, regardless of improvements made in the meantime, will not suffice for the period contemplated by the Committee.

That is in direct contradiction of what TransAustralia Airlines told the Committee. It is obviously the result of a survey that has been carried out by the Department, because the Department told the Committee nothing about this. The Department obviously treated the Committee with contempt in relation to that matter.

I refer to what TAA stated in its evidence in relation to the terminal buildings. It said that the current state of the existing terminal buildings, aprons, roads and surfaces is such that it is possible with some improvement to cater for TAA forecast traffic levels for the next 12 to 15 years or about 6 years longer than 1992. TAA also told us that the situation in Brisbane is not as serious as that which exists at some other airports in Australia. So that is the situation in relation to the terminal buildings. If the Committee is to bring down a solid report it is unfortunate, I think, that we are not given the benefit of some of these analyses made by the Department of Transport. Our proceedings are conducted in such a way that the Department of Transport has the right and the opportunity at the end of the evidence to counter any of the other evidence that has been given. But we still received no evidence in relation to that matter.

In his statement the Minister says that these costs to be borne by the airlines will inevitably increase fares. The point I wish to make in relation to that matter is that these costs will increase air fares to a much smaller extent than will the total costs incurred through the cost recovery program. In fact, the amounts contemplated by the two airlines were something like $2m, $4m and $6m. In the first year of operation of the Brisbane airport development- in 1985-86- the total amount to be paid by the airlines under the cost recovery program will be something like $ 13.5m. That compares the two components that will cause air fares to rise.

There were a number of other inaccuracies in the report. Because I know that some other honourable members whose electorates are located in Brisbane wish to speak on this matter I will not say any more, except to refer to the Minister’s statement that the Government’s recommendation in relation to the extension of the runway is based on paragraph 1 13 of the Committee’s report. In fact, paragraph 1 13 of the report is almost word for word part of the submission that the Qantas representatives gave to the Committee under oath. If the Department has got further information from Qantas the Committee certainly has not been told of it. Qantas gave the Committee that information under oath and we accepted it as being true and genuine. The Department now tells us that it has other information. There are a number of other points that I could make. But, as I said, the Committee supports the general concept of the development. Our argument is in relation to the timing of it. I feel that the Government has made a mistake in adhering to the original timing proposal.

Mr Keith Johnson:
BURKE, VICTORIA · ALP

-I rise to defend the Committee’s report. Having heard the statement by the Minister for Transport (Mr Nixon) and having read it as he was reading it to the House, I find that this Minister, who is quite well known throughout Australia for his contempt of Parliament and all that is associated with it, was quite contemptuous of the report written by the Committee. In fact, I would be highly surprised if he even read it. It seems to me that the Minister and or the Government have treated the Committee and this Parliament with contempt. This proposal involves an expenditure initially of some $90m and eventually $172m. After taking evidence from witnesses for more than five days- all of them were under oath- the Committee came to certain conclusions on this matter, although I might say that they were not unanimous conclusions. It did not do that lightly.

The Committee presented its report yesterday afternoon, and it was ordered that it be printed. This afternoon, 24 hours later, this Minister holds the whole report in contempt. In fact, I bet that his statement had been written before he even read the report. He brought the matter back into the House today. We have limited time available to debate this statement, and he knew that. It is an old tactic of his: ‘Jam them right up and you will get them right out of the bales’. So at the last moment he brought this matter before the Parliament and he is giving us all a limited time to talk on it. The whole proposal, in my view, is based on emotion rather than fact.

If his Department were more competent than it was when it appeared before the Committee during this inquiry it would have argued strongly that a new airport should be developed in Brisbane. It did not do this. The Minister says that the Department had information that was not available to the Committee. Why was it not available to the Committee? Does the Committee have to drag everything out of the Department? Why can his Department not put together in the first instance something that does not have to be brought out by cross-examination oy the Committee? The Committee spent a lot of time just getting the Minister’s Department to give us facts and figures. Finally, the Committee had to get the Department to rewrite them all because nothing lined up; they were out of sequence. Having got all of those facts and figures before us and having marshalled and mustered and considered them- we spent a lot of time doing thatthe Committee came to the conclusions set out in its report. The Minister- I take him to task on this here or anywhere- made a rather bland statement about the inordinate taxi-ing distances of up to 6 kilometres for aircraft at Brisbane airport. The Minister in his statement said:

The Department of Transport is satisfied, that subject to appropriate operating procedures . . .

I do not know whether that means that the aircraft will be pulled around with a Ferguson tractor, but we were told if these aircraft were run under their own steam for 6 kilometres their brake linings would heat up to 1,200 degrees fahrenheit. If they were to stand for a period of 90 minutes after attaining that temperature they would lose only half of that heat. The heat would drop to 600 degrees and that is when the tyres pop. The Minister’s statement continued:

The interim use of the present international terminal would not be prejudical to safety.

If the Minister is a responsible Minister he will expunge those words because the use would be prejudical to safety. I invite him, instead of smirking to his colleagues behind him, to find out what happened at Honolulu airport when the reef strip was built. Qantas told us of that. If the Minister wants to charge Qantas with contempt of the Committee, he can go ahead and do it. That report is based on the evidence of Qantas and the operators. I know that time is running out and I do not want to delay the House more than is necessary, but I think this matter is very important. I cannot understand the Minister’s statement about paragraph 113. At the top of page S of the statement he said:

This recommendation relies on paragraph 113 of the Committee’s report which conflicts with advice obtained recently by the Department from Qantas.

I do not know how recently that advice was obtained. He stated further

The Government will further investigate this aspect to determine whether there is need to review the required length of the proposed new runway.

Who said that? Nowhere in this report does the Committee deal with the length of the proposed runway. This is what makes me suspicious. I do not think that the Minister has read the report. If he reads it he will find that the Committee is saying that with a maximum of a further 300 metres added to the existing runway- not the proposed runway- it would allow Qantas flights, with any configuration of loads- passengers, fuel, luggage and cargo- to go anywhere that Qantas might want them to go. If honourable members read the report they will find that Qantas flights can go anywhere they want to go now but the extra 300 metres of runway would allow them to go where they might want to go. So the Minister has not read the report. He is railroading this matter through the Parliament. If this Parliament were a responsible parliament it would defer this matter and hold it over until honourable members have had time to read that report and to find out how irresponsible this Minister is in making offthecuff statements about things not being prejudicial to safety. No responsible Minister can say that. I hold strongly to the view that the Committee is correct in its conclusions. I agree with all 13 conclusions. If the Government had any sense and any respect for this Parliament, and if it were not our pork-barreling, which I rather suspect it might be- a Country Party Minister our porkbarreling; goodness, gracious me, who would ever make such an allegation?- it would certainly let the matter have further investigation by the Parliament. The Government is not prepared to do that. I trust that the Parliament will reject this statement and adjourn the matter until next year.

Mr KEVIN CAIRNS:
Lilley

-I want to say a few pleasant things for a few minutes. I support completely what the Minister for Transport (Mr Nixon) had to say. What he said is correct. He should be assured that at least two and a half million people in Australia applaud every sentence of his statement. The Joint Parliamentary Committee on Public Works is a very important committee. It has a very distinguished chairman. But of course the Parliament is still the Parliament and committees do not run the country. Parliament is responsible for legislation and for the economic management of the country. I know that all sensible members here support what the Minister said. Let me go over the history of this project. I am incited to do this because of what has been said by the previous speaker, the honourable member for Burke (Mr Keith Johnson). Brisbane airport has been a makeshift one since World War II. It was developed by the Americans when Brisbane was a garrison town in World War II. The airport has always been inadequate, poorly planned and in an inappropriate place.

There are those of us here who have fought for many years- well over a decade- for this event to take place. It is appropriate that at the end of the parliamentary year in 1979 the highlight is represented by the Minister’s statement. I now come to the politics of the matter. A question worth asking- I hope that everybody asks this question- is: Were this Government not on these benches, would this airport project be going ahead? I have been provoked to say that it would not be going ahead. I produce at least two imporant pieces of evidence. Every person who gets a job in constructing this airport- there will be 6,000 man years involved in its constructionought to remember that were this Government not in office, the project would not be going ahead. The McMahon Government at the end of 1971 and the beginning of 1972 stated quite clearly what were the plans for the construction of the airport. There was a program of expenditure for 1973, 1974 and 1975. That decision was predicted. In 1973 the Whitlam Governmentthrough the agency of the Coombs report- said: No airport. Put it off. It ‘s not a goer. Don ‘t do it ‘. When the present Prime Minister (Mr Malcolm Fraser), in the election campaign in 1977, indicated that the airport project would get under way, very sadly the then Deputy Leader of the Opposition- I have not quoted this in the House before- on behalf of the Opposition said:

We are not going to pull any Brisbane airport out of a Pandora ‘s box’. Everybody should know that the Opposition, when in Government, said no. Were the Opposition in government, the project would not be in the process of authorisation of this expenditure today. The honourable member for Griffith (Mr Humphreys) knows that I have not said this kind of thing before, but I have been provoked to say this by words that were uttered earlier in the debate.

I have two minutes left in which to deal with one or two points. The Committee’s proposal for the development of the airport by adding to the present runway, doing something to the terminals and so on, then proceeding to build a new airport half a dozen years later, would have two effects. Honourable members know that if they postpone something for half a dozen years, it will not be done. That is not in the mind of the Committee. But it is a more expensive proposition to put more money into the present site and then half a dozen years later to build the new airport. That involves an expenditure of an extra $2 5 m. More precisely, because of the immediate terminal propositions and because of those effects on air fares, it would not have been an acceptable proposition to increase air fares in six years time; it was an acceptable proposition to increase air fares today when the first brick was put on the new site, as would have to be done by Ansett Airlines of Australia and Trans-Australia Airlines and so on. That builds immediately into the cost structure. The Committee’s proposal was uneconomic. It has another fault. It relies upon estimates of the throughput of traffic at Brisbane Airport. The Committee never made a judgment about this. I am not scarifying it as I have too much respect for the Committee and its chairman, but I believe that the result was influenced too much by the inadequate and grubby evidence submitted by Australia’s domestic airlines. They have a vested interest in under estimating the throughput of passengers. They were attempting to project matters 20 years ahead and they have never done that successfully before. That should not have occurred. I support the Minister’s statement. I have made the political position perfectly clear for the first time in this House. It had to be made perfectly clear. The project will be a capital works program of enormous economic benefit and it will help the whole northern part of Australia.

Mr HUMPHREYS:
Griffith

– It troubles me today to have to talk against the Public Works Committee as I am a member of it. I support many of the conclusions that the Public Works Committee reached. I thought that the

Department of Transport was lackening in giving the Committee the full evidence that it required. It had to giVe the Committee two submissions. I must congratulate the Department of Housing and Construction on its magnificent effort. Today the honourable member for Lilley (Mr Kevin Cairns) justified the expenditure of public moneys to suit his own political needs. I remind the honourable member for Lilley of what he said today, and I will remind the constituents of his electorate and all the people in Brisbane. I will remind those people that the honourable member has agreed with everything that the Minister has said. The Minister has approved the lifting of the curfew when the new international airport is built. As proposed by the Department of Transport, runway 02/20 will shift the noise problem from the electorates of Lilley and Brisbane into my electorate of Griffith.

Mr Kevin Cairns:

– That is not correct.

Mr HUMPHREYS:

– It is correct. On the evidence of the Department of Transport the constituents of my electorate, mainly those in the areas of Cannon Hill and Morningside, will be within the 25-NEF- Noise Exposure Forecast. If the Department of Transport had given greater consideration to this matter it would have moved runway 02/20 probably a mile further north-east so that the constituents in my electorate would not have come within the 25-NEF, thereby alleviating the problem that they will be inundated with from noise pollution, air pollution and not least of all the hazards of fully laden aircraft taking off in a south-easterly direction at certain times of the year over a heavily populated area of my electorate.

The Committee did recognise in its conclusions the noise problem in the Brisbane residential area but did not think it was of such a magnitude as to justify the expenditure of the money at this time. I cannot agree with that. I feel that we should spend the money. I want to make it clear that the city of Brisbane and the State of Queensland should have a new international airport. When the Department of Housing and Construction and the Department of Transport were designing the airport they should have thought a little harder instead of playing politics and taking noise pollution out of one electorate and placing it in my electorate. This is what concerns me more than Brisbane and Queensland getting a new international airport.

As other members of the Public Works Committee have already explained in this place, when phase 1 of the project is completed there will be taxi-ing problems. The Jumbo jets will not be able to taxi the full 6.5 kilometres. They will have problems with tyres blowing out because of heat. The light aircraft that will have to taxi that distance will have cylinder head problems and will have to shut down before they can take off. Jumbo jets will be taking off with their tyres blown out. That is okay; they can take off with tyres blown out, but they cannot land. These are the sorts of hazards that this Minister has agreed to today, and so has the honourable member for Lilley. They are agreeing today that the airport at Brisbane will have a runway which will allow aircraft to taxi that distance. It is totally irresponsible of the Minister. I suggest that when he sent his officers from the Department of Transport to give evidence in Brisbane to the Committee he deliberately told them not to give the Committee the full details. The Department of Housing and Construction did give full evidence, but the evidence of the Department of Transport was lacking. It is the Minister who is playing politics. He knew that the evidence that the Department of Transport would give to the Committee would make it reach the conclusion that it did and then he could come into the House and claim to be a great man by saying: ‘We are not going to listen to the Committee. We are going to let the project go ahead ‘. It is absolutely disgraceful of the Minister and I deplore his actions today. He is saying that the people of Brisbane are going to be inundated with noise pollution, air pollution, safety hazards and they will be without a curfew. The Minister will remember and rue the day he has made this decision.

Motion ( by Mr Bourchier) proposed:

That the question be now put.

Mr Donald Cameron:
FADDEN, QUEENSLAND · LP

– How dare you! Mr Deputy Speaker, I raise a point of order.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-The question is: That the question be now put. Those of that opinion say aye; to the contrary no -

Mr Donald Cameron:
FADDEN, QUEENSLAND · LP

- Mr Deputy Speaker, I raise a point of order. I do not believe that you could even accept a motion like that in the first place.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER:

-Order! There is no substance in the point of order.

Question put. The House divided. (Mr Deputy Speaker-Mr P. H. Drummond)

AYES: 51

NOES: 34

Majority……. 17

In division-

AYES

NOES

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Original question resolved in the affirmative.

page 3410

JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND DEFENCE

Report

Mr KATTER:
Kennedy

-On behalf of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence, I present the Committee’s report on Australian defence procurement, together with the transcript of evidence.

Ordered that the report be printed.

Mr KATTER:

-by leave-First of all, I thank my friend and colleague, the honourable member for Higgins (Mr Shipton), for the privilege of tabling this report. In presenting this report, I inform the House that a separate report is in preparation on that pan of the terms of reference related to assistance to the civil power. I point out to the House that it seems that, when matters of defence come forward, by a conspiracy of circumstance, time is cut short to a point where there is practically no debate at all. I think it most regrettable that an important report of this nature, particularly at a time like this when international events are anything but encouraging, should be introduced at this very late stage.

The precise terms of reference for the present report were: ‘The implementation and effectiveness of Australia’s announced defence programs, with particular reference to procurement policy’. This reference was received on 12 July 1978 and Sub-committee C of the Joint Committee commenced hearings on 20 June. The last formal evidence was presented in October 1979. In the intervening 18 months, we took over 2,300 pages of written and oral evidence from a very wide range of sources. The report is not a lengthy document, but I put it to the House that it may be one of the more significant papers to emerge from the parliamentary committee system in recent years. It represents a year and a half of concentrated work and detailed examination of evidence in a very complex field. It was exhaustively considered before being agreed to.

This report takes ‘procurement’ in its widest sense. It examines the procurement process from the initial strategic analysis right through to the acquisition of equipment for the defence forces. We have expressed our full agreement with the strategic assessment as set out in the 1976 defence White Paper and as subsequently updated and restated by the Minister for Defence (Mr Killen). It is most unlikely that Australia could become the target of major direct attack inside the next five years. At the same time, we allude to the Sino- Vietnamese conflict and developments in Iran and, I might add, developments in Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia and here, there and everywhere, not in any alarmist way but to point out the continuing potential for sudden and unforeseeable changes.

I wish to acquaint the House with our major recommendations. Honourable members will appreciate that in a statement of this type brevity is essential, and I commend a study of the report to those who wish a full outline of the Committee’s views on the subjects I now mention. We have certain reservations concerning what is known as the ‘core force’ concept. These centre on our concern for the capacity of the Defence Force to expand rapidly enough to meet some contingencies. Our concern is sufficient to prompt us to recommend that a high-level inquiry into the expansion capability of the Defence Force be undertaken. There is a need for an interdepartmental or national approach to such an inquiry which should determine the industrial and manpower support which could be available to the force-in-being.

This Committee reported two years ago on Australian defence industry, and we have followed the matter up in the present report. We maintain our view that our defence industry base is not as good as it might be, and that we should develop it to make Australia as free as possible from dependence on foreign suppliers. We suggest that this can be achieved through the provision of stable workloads, acceptance of apparent cost disadvantages where these are not excessive, improved communication between industry and the Department of Defence and, importantly, by Government and the Department sticking to decisions previously announced.

The Committee, whilst concurring with the view that our strategic outlook is favourable, wishes to make the point that we should use this time to advantage. We consider that it would be unwise to wait for some threat to emerge before acting to enhance preparedness and further increase our self-reliance. We do not suggest in detail how this might be done, or how much money should be allocated. We recommend that Government act to determine several matters: The most effective security strategy; capabilities needed to execute that strategy; deficiencies in our present capabilities; and what is required to make good any such deficiencies. We recommend that these capabilities be introduced over a 10-year period, and wish to make the points that this will require a bipartisan approach to defence. Some form of supplemental equipment acquisition budgeting may also be required. Such funding would provide for supplemental 10-year budgeting packages to cover the development, production and entry into service of specific equipment systems. This funding would be separate from the annual defence budget. We think this an extremely important consideration. I repeat it: This funding would be separate from the annual defence budget.

The Committee received convincing evidence that there is a problem in procedures which apply to the purchase of defence equipment in Australia. We are persuaded that these procedures act as a deterrent to Australian industry and to the Department of Defence. We have recommended improvements, and suggested principles on which these might be based. We have made an exhaustive study of the Defence Department’s decision-making system. A major point arising from this study is the length of time it can take to acquire a piece of major equipment for the forces. According to standard Defence Department procedures it can take up to eight years from the issuance of a major equipment proposal, and rarely takes less than three or four. These lead times exceed likely periods of warning for some defence contingencies we may have to face. This has been accentuated over the last two or three days. The Committee has therefore recommended that, if it is not possible to reduce the contribution of decision-making to lead times, key major equipments should be acquired earlier. Our examination of the organisation of defence procurement revealed that for several reasons aspects of this function have been dispersed between various departments or agencies. The Committee considers that this dispersal can lead to inefficiencies or lack of flexibility. For this reason, we have recommended that functions related to the procurement of major military equipment now with the Department of Administrative Services be transferred to the Department of Defence.

The development of the Defence Force should be based on a deterrent posture to show that the cost of interference with Australia or her vital interests would be prohibitive and should seek to demonstrate that Australia is concerned to contribute to the security of the region. The approach used by the Defence Department to define the Defence Force requirements- the core force concept- has much to commend it in a period of financial stringency. The Committee considers, however, that there has been an overemphasis on this approach. The Committee agrees with the introduction to the 1976 White Paper on Defence which stated:

The first responsibility of government is to provide the nation with security from armed attack and from the constraints on independent national decisions imposed by the threat of such attack.

However, long lead items, high attrition rates and potential political direction of military action may dictate that future conflicts will be of relatively short duration but of very high intensity, with limited prospect of immediate resupply. Therefore, the force in being, in contrast to the core force, must be sufficient to survive the initial shock of such conflict and still establish a base of capabilities for subsequent action. If this objective is to be attained, it will require the allocation of additional financial resources to defence, particularly for the timely acquisition of new equipments. In examining the procedures, practices and constraints relevant to the selection and subsequent acquisition of specific brand names of equipment, the Committee formed the view that:

The system for procurement from Australian sources is excessively cumbersome and complex and that it poses serious problems for both the Defence Department and local industry;

The Government should direct relevant Departments and agencies to produce an improved system for local defence procurement, and that this should be a matter of high priority;

The expenditure overseas of large sums on defence equipment should in principle be supervised by Australians; and

The Department of Defence should investigate ways of reducing the contribution of departmental decision-making processes to equipment acquisition lead times, which often exceed the five year warning period spoken of before, without degrading the quality of decisions. If this is not possible, it will be necessary to acquire additional equipments well in advance- I have already stated this- of any warning period.

The evidence shows that the organisation of procurement:

Divides responsibility between too many departments and agencies, with a consequent lack of consistency and loss of fast reaction time; fails to take account of the fact, recognised in overseas reports and organisations, that procurement is a specialist activity in its own right; and so far as local procurement is concerned, is based on requirements and practices which tend to erode our defence industrial base.

Australia is separated from its overseas suppliers of defence equipment by long lines of communication. These lines of communication are vulnerable and potentially capable of interdiction although Australia’s dependence on the use of foreign shipping for the carriage of its overseas trade restricts this possibility to the context of a general threat to Western shipping. In a deteriorating world situation overseas suppliers would be likely to accord higher priority to their own needs than Australia’s. That is pretty obvious. In a conflict with a regional country, overseas suppliers may be unwilling to provide Australia with its defence requirements. For these cogent strategic reasons the Committee recommends that Australia should become increasingly self-reliant for its production of defence equipment.

It is necessary that there should be informed discussion in the electorate and the Parliament with a bipartisan approach developed in respect of defence policies and strategies, the essential requirements of the Defence Force, and the extent to which these resources should be allocated to provide these requirements. The Parliament, through its committee structure, should monitor all defence programs, and the Department of Defence should be encouraged to make a positive and continuing contribution to the informed nature of the debate by its active participation in and promotion of public seminars and by its briefing of the Parliament on defence issues. In this regard the Committee notes several innovations in recent months where this has been done. They are all to the good.

In determining priorities for development of the Defence Force consideration should be given to the following elements:

Those capabilities that are required to provide a military response to the lesser contingencies which could arise with little or no warning; those high performance capabilities relating to a general strategic requirement as dictated by the characteristics of the environment rather than by specific contingencies and required to provide deterrence against the use of military pressures or military means by a potential enemy to achieve its objectives and which could not be acquired within the period of warning likely to be available before a major threat to Australia could develop; and a representative selection of second tier or substitute capabilities- moderate cost, moderate performance, short lead time systems, that could be acquired in relatively large numbers during a period of developing threat- to enable the development of operating techniques, procedures and doctrines in a short period of crisis.

I pay tribute to members of the Committee. Each member of the Sub-Committee was completely objective in his approach to our responsibilities and I commend each member for his continued interest and the serious manner in which we examined and evaluated the evidence and finally formulated the recommendations.

I wish to thank Malcolm Hills for his intense dedication to his work and to express the regrets of the Sub-Committee that continued illness has deprived the Committee of his services.

Robert King has done a splendid job under extreme difficulties. When Mr Hills was not available Mr King was there to take over and the Sub-Committee is grateful to him.

Our two consultants, Commodore Ken Gray and Gary Brown justified the reputation they both have for their knowledge and understanding of the defence scene. The vast and valuable experience of Ken Gray and the observations and monitoring of defence activities here and abroad by Gary combined to provide most valuable assistance to the Sub-Committee.

Finally the Sub-Committee is immensely grateful to all who were prepared to appear before it and assist with their submissions.

The Minister for Defence, the Honourable Jim Killen, and the Minister assisting him, the Honourable John McLeay, never hesitated to make every possible facility available to the SubCommittee to assist our inquiries as a result of Minister Killen ‘s co-operation Defence Department witnesses of the highest possible calibre appeared as witnesses before the Sub-Committee.

Having said this, I must point out that, as this House is well aware, the inquiry which has produced this report has on occasions been controversial. On one or two occasions the controversy has reached this House.

I have to inform the House that the Subcommittee expresses concern about remarks made in the House on 26 October 1978 by the Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence and on 8 March 1979 by the Minister for Defence.

We consider that the Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence over-reacted to criticism which had been levelled at the Department of Defence by witnesses who appeared before the subcommittee at public hearings and which in some cases had received Press publicity. The subcommittee considers that, to a lesser degree, the Minister for Defence also over-reacted to such criticisms.

At the time of the criticisms levelled at the subcommittee, evidence favourable to and critical of the Department had been presented and further evidence was still to come. All this evidence had yet to be evaluated by the sub-committee and, accordingly, any criticisms of the sub-committee for its handling of the evidence were premature and ill founded. The sub-committee emphasises that the inquiry was carried out in accordance with the established procedures of the committee system of the Parliament and its Standing Orders. We therefore reject the criticisms that were levelled at the sub-committee, though we appreciate that the Ministers were understandably sensitive to some of the Press coverage of evidence given at public sessions of the sub-committee.

We are pleased to note that, as further evidence was received and evaluated, far better understanding obtained between the Minister for Defence and the Department of Defence on the one hand and the sub-committee on the other. As a matter of fact, it built up to a crescendo. People from the Defence Department of the very highest calibre, appeared before the Committee by authorisation of the Minister, including Sir Arthur Tange and Sir Anthony Synnot.

I have also to inform the House that certain allegations have been made regarding the alleged intimidation of some witnesses before the subcommittee. These allegations are under examination. The Minister for Defence responded in detail in this House in November 1978 to the previous report of the Committee on defence industry. This mark of attention by the Government was most welcome.

I commend this report to the House, and consider it essential that the report be debated after honourable members have had time to consider it. In that regard, I appeal to the Leader of the House (Mr Viner) to put on the program of business very early in the next sitting a debate on this report. I look forward to comment by the Minister for Defence in debate in this House after he has had opportunity to consider the matters raised in the report.

Mr VINER:
Leader of the House · Stirling · LP

– I am aware that a number of honourable members on both sides of the House would like the opportunity to debate this report at some later time. I therefore seek leave to move a motion that the House take note of the report.

Leave granted.

Mr VINER:

-I move:

Mr SCHOLES:
Corio

-This report covers one of the important areas of government responsibility, especially in the area of defence. It has come before this Parliament not without considerable difficulties and some traumas. Firstly, this sub-committee of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence is seriously understaffed in view of the type of task it is required to carry out and the level and quality of reports it should be expected to produce on behalf of the Parliament. The people who have worked for the sub-committee have done more than should be required of such persons on behalf of the Parliament. Certainly the Parliament should examine seriously at some stage whether it wants such reports and, if it does as I indicated on another occasion when speaking on another report, it has to accept the responsibility of providing the necessary resources and finance. It is unfortunate that this House has decided that a separate committee on defence is not warranted, as I consider this subject is of sufficient importance to warrant such a committee.

The last two major reports of this subcommitteethe first on Australian defence industry and this one on Australian defence procurement- have examined two of the most difficult and important areas of government responsibility both nationally and internationally. The sums of money involved in procurement, the difficulties faced by the Parliament, which appropriates the sums of money included and the methods by which procurement becomes the private operation of a few individuals are subjects which should consistently and continually be examined by this House. During the period covered by this report a number of shortcomings, if not deficiencies, within the procurement system were exposed. Some of the deficiencies were minor, some were major. One thing which is highlighted is that one or two individuals in the employment of the Government have suffered very materially because they gave evidence honestly to the Committee about faults in the system- whether accurate or otherwise- which they believed to be correct. I think they have been treated very badly by the Department concerned and by the Minister for Defence (Mr Killen), who is responsible for that Department. He took the opportunity on one occasion in this House to make remarks about witnesses which were not warranted in any other way than as political justification.

If there is to be an honest examination of procedures, if the procurement of defence equipment in Australia is to proceed on a basis which is above any form of criticism and which is to the advantage not only of the Australian Defence Force but also of the Australian nation, continuing examination of procedures and of the results and decision-making processes is necessary by this Parliament. This report marks the commencement of the examination of a problem. The report really should be repeated in the next Parliament by a full committee of this House, with adequate staffing and facilities, to see whether some of the problems raised during the hearing have been dealt with. If they have not, the failure to deal with them should be highlighted in every possible way.

May I mention one or two practices that are a problem. Overseas tenderers for Australian equipment in many instances have substantial commercial advantages over Australian-based firms. Firstly, they are able to negotiate on the basis of estimate prices and not the actual price. Quite often they have the advantage of commercial assistance for their operations at government level which is not available to Australian firms. They are subject to different contractual arrangements which are beneficial to the overseas firms. In many cases, the actual specifications for the goods required are written in a form which denies more than one company the opportunity to tender. There was one instance in evidence where for five years an Australian firm had been seeking an alteration to the specifications for the provision of goods which are costing this Government $150,000 a year more than they would cost to buy from the Australian firm, but the Australian firm cannot tender. There are also cases of brand name tenders, which makes a farce to the tender system.

I would like to say much more, but I will refer to only one thing which I think the chairman of the sub-committee did not mention. I will conclude on this note. I thank not only those people who worked on the sub-committee but also the Parliamentary Librarian for making arrangements for Gary Brown to be made available to the sub-committee. Without him we would have been in grave difficulties because of the total lack of staff available. Two officers are not enough for such a job, and anyone who suggests that it is sufficient is a fool. I also thank the chairman for the manner in which he conducted the inquiry. I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later stage.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 3414

TRANSITION FROM SCHOOL TO WORK

Mr VINER:
Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs · Stirling · LP

– I table a copy of the statement by the Minister for Education (Senator Carrick) on the report of the Committee of Inquiry into Education and Training. I intended to table that report when I made a statement earlier today on transition policies.

page 3414

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT

Valedictory

Mr VINER:
Leader of the House · Stirling · LP

– I move:

That the House, at its rising, adjourn until Tuesday, 19 February next, at 2.15 p.m., unless Mr Speaker shall fix an alternative day or hour of meeting or, in the incapacity or absence from Australia of Mr Speaker, the Chairman of Committees may fix an alternative day or hour, such alternative day or hour of meeting to be notified by telegram or letter addressed to each member of the House.

In speaking to that motion, I take the opportunity to make a few remarks at the close of this session and at the close of this year. I have been Leader of the House for only a short time. I would like to express my thanks to all those people who have so strongly supported me in this new role. I thank you, Mr Speaker, for the help and assistance which you have given me and for the help and assistance which you have given the whole House in the manner in which you have conducted the proceedings of this House during these Budget sittings. As you know, Mr Speaker, you and I are both barristers. In that respect, some may think that we have earned the title learned in the law’. Others may not agree, of course. When it comes to the application of the Standing Orders, you have had occasion to point out to me the error of some of my ways in this chamber. I have been thankful for the coaching that you have given me in doing that. I hope that with continued coaching I might be able m time to learn the art of the Leader of the House. You Mr Speaker, have conducted the proceedings of this House with decorum, dignity and appropriate firmness, where that has been required. I think all members of the House appreciate the way in which you have done that.

I would like to thank the Chairman of Committees and the Deputy Speakers for the way in which they have handled their side of the business of the House. There have been some lengthy debates in Committee as well as at the second reading stage of Bills. The Chairman of Committees and each of the Deputy Speakers have handled that responsibility well and capably. I would like to thank the Clerks at the Table for the way in which they have helped me in my role as Leader of the House. I thank the staff in the Table Office and the other offices of the Parliament. I also thank the Clerks and the other staff and officers on behalf of all members of the House. Theirs is a very important role. The role of the Clerk is to advise you, Mr Speaker, the Chairman of Committees and the Deputy Speakers. If the Clerk, his officers and the other staff in this area do not operate efficiently, sensibly and wisely, then of course the affairs of this House will stumble.

I wish to make particular mention of my colleague, the right honourable member for New England (Mr Sinclair), who is the former Leader of the House. I can speak very plainly on behalf of all of us on this side of the House. We were very sorry to see the way in which the honourable gentleman was treated and the circumstances in which he felt, in the highest sense of duty as a Minister and as a member of parliament, obliged to resign his ministry and his position as Leader of the House. I think we would all say that as we look at 1980 we would certainly hope that the right honourable member for New England will obtain a clear acquittal of the charges levelled against him and that he will come back to this House next year with a completely clean bill of health. We look forward to working very closely with him in the future.

I wish to express my thanks to my colleague and close friend, the Government Whip. He and I were both elected to this House in 1972. We both won seats from the Labor Party in an election when the Liberal and Country parties lost government. I thank also the Deputy Whip for his assistance to me. I thank the Opposition Whip and the Deputy Opposition Whip for the way in which they have co-operated with us within the vicissitudes of parliament and the requirements of their own party. I thank also my counterpart, the honourable member for Port Adelaide (Mr Young) for the way in which we have been able to co-operate, again within the interests of and responsibilities for our own parties, to keep the business of the House running smoothly. I have appreciated since becoming Leader of the House, that the Parliamentary Liaison Officer occupies a vital role in the machinery of government. For two and a half years to the end of the last autumn sittings Roger Webb was the Parliamentary Liaison Officer to the former Leader of the House. He has now returned to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. In his place, John Fox has performed the function of Parliamentary Liaison Officer extremely well, extremely ably and with an assiduousness that ought to be commended. He has occupied that position from the commencement of the Budget sittings.

The Hansard staff, as we would judge from some of the proceedings in recent days, has a very difficult task- but nevertheless, as we know, a very important task- in reporting faithfully what has been said in this House for the Hansard record. I thank the Principal Parliamentary Reporter and his staff. Always there is the Public Service, more often than not, in anonymity behind all those of whom I have spoken up to now. I wish to thank all of those members of the Public Service who work in support of the operations of this Parliament for the way in which they have carried out their functions. I also thank the staff of the Parliament who help us in this House.

During the session there have been a number of parliamentary reforms. I will mention them only briefly. The Estimates committees were introduced for the first time. They were conducted as an experiment. I am sure that during the recess honourable members will seriously examine the operation of those Estimates committees, as will the Government. Legislation committees came into operation in the autumn sittings. Although they have not been used in the Budget sittings, I expect that they will be used in the next autumn sittings. You, Mr Speaker, have circulated a paper on the Estimates committees. Also, the Clerk has circulated a paper on the parliamentary committee system. The report of the Standing Orders Committee which suggests changes to the way in which petitions and claims of privilege are handled is before the House. I expect that during the recess honourable members will consider those papers and reports.

Mr Speaker, we are about to leave the decade of the 1970s and enter the decade of the 1980s. I am sure that my colleague, the Deputy Prime Minister ( Mr Anthony) will say to the House that the Government certainly faces the 1980s with confidence. We are very happy with the way in which the Government has operated during this year. We are also very happy with the way in which the House has been able to operate with the help and assistance of you and of the other officers whom I have mentioned. I wish to you, Sir, and to all those other officers and staff, the compliments of the season and a happy and healthy New Year. As always, we need that health so that we can carry on our work.

Mr ANTHONY:
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Resources · Richmond · NCP/NP

-Mr Speaker, as we prepare to leave this House to spend some time in our electorates and with our families and friends for the Christmas season I wish to convey to all members my very best wishes. I hope that they have a very good break and will return refreshed in the New Year.

It is not inappropriate to note that as we prepare to leave the House we cannot help looking around the world and seeing a great deal of concern. There is certainly no reason for any calmness or complacency. At the moment there are very real tensions, particularly in the Islamic world. There are tensions between nations that must be of great concern to all of us. Many lives are endangered. There are enormous difficulties in Asia. There are continuing problems in Africa. I know that all members will join with me in expressing concern at the serious wounding of an Australian journalist, Mr Tony Joyce, in an accident in Zambia yesterday. As we prepare for the Christmas season, the season of goodwill, we must all fervently hope that reason and sense will prevail, that tensions will ease, that men and women of goodwill will be able to comprehend the dangers in the present situation and that compromise and solutions will be found to their many problems.

Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister (Mr Malcolm Fraser) cannot be with us today, as you know, but I think I could express on behalf of all his colleagues- indeed, everybody in this chamber their wishes to him for a quick and speedy recovery. It is bad enough being sick at any time, but for a person in a high public position, carrying enormous responsibilities, it is very difficult to be able to free oneself from those responsibilities, free oneself to the extent that is necessary for convalescence when one has been damaged by illness. I know that he would like me to thank all of those people who have served the Parliament so efficiently and with so much dedication this year. Firstly, I would like to thank you, Mr Speaker, for the excellent job that you have done as Speaker of this Parliament. You distinguished yourself by the very dignified way in which you hold that great office. You have had a very busy year. I know sometimes it has been somewhat turbulent, but with your unfailing good humour you have always been able to bring the House back to its senses. You have been ably backed up by the Chairman of Committees, the honourable member for Wide Bay (Mr Millar) who on a number of occasions has had to sit in for you and has done an admirable job. He too has been supported by the Temporary Chairmen who have done an excellent job with the workings of this chamber.

I would like to put on record appreciation of the work of the Clerk of the House and his officers. They provide great assistance and indeed very wise advice. Anybody from outside who might think that there are some apparent and obvious deficiencies in this Parliament must recognise that the situation would be absolutely impossible without the assistance of the Clerk and his officers. I would like to thank the staff of the Table Office for their assistance to us all. To the Parliamentary Liaison Officer, John Fox, who took over from Roger Webb during the sittings, I express my thanks for his work in making the House function so smoothly. But there are many, many people who help in the workings of Parliament and we owe them thanks. The Librarian Mr Weir, and his staff; Hansard, led by Mr Kerr; the Joint House Department, under its Secretary Mr Donnelly; the First Parliamentary Counsel, Mr Quayle and his staff; the attendants; dining room staff; transport officers; and all of those people who make life possible in this place. I would also like to mention those silent members in the Australian Broadcasting Commission box who spread the activities of this Parliament right across the nation and whom we so often tend to overlook.

I would like to thank especially the members of the Public Service who not only serve Ministers but all members as well. I believe that in this country we have a Public Service that we can be extremely proud of, a band of dedicated, efficient, skilled people who serve their nation and, in many cases, they serve with real distinction. To my ministerial colleagues who carry so many burdens of office- far greater burdens than most people realise and I think that one has to experience being a Minister to realise the extent of responsibility they carry- I offer my thanks and the thanks of the Prime Minister for their loyalty, their support and their co-operation, and indeed their hard work. I am proud of being part of a ministerial team, part of the Government team, and I know that all my ministerial colleagues are, too. To all my party colleagues in the Liberal Party and the National Country Party I offer my thinks for their support, co-operation and for their work in the Parliament, in the committees and in many other ways. Appreciation also goes to the Whips of both the Liberal Party and my own party for keeping us in an orderly state. To the Leader of the Opposition (Mr

Hayden) and to all of his colleagues, may I express my thanks for their contribution to the work of Parliament and my good wishes for the Christmas period and the year ahead.

Mr Speaker, I believe that the great majority of Australians can look forward to 1980 with a great deal more optimism and confidence than they have been able to contemplate for any year for some time. The world faces many difficulties, political problems, economic problems, the threat of conflict and the realities of human misery on a very large scale. Australia, despite its own problems, is indeed a fortunate country. Australians are fortunate people and I only hope that their goodwill will be accompanied by a sense of responsibility. We do have a responsibility to the rest of the world, a responsibility we can exercise in many ways by providing the world with food and fibre, providing the world with energy and raw materials, and by responding in a humanitarian way to the plight of the world’s poor and hungry people, to the world’s refugees, especially at the moment in places like Indo-China, and to the people of Timor. These are some of the matters we need to think of at this time of the year. Indeed, we should think of them at all times.

To you, Mr Speaker, and to all honourable members, I express the hope that you have a very restful and enjoyable Christmas and holiday break and that you all return next year ready to cope with the demands, challenges and responsibilities of another year of public duty.

Mr HAYDEN:
Leader of the Opposition · Oxley

– I join with the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Anthony) in conveying seasonal greetings to the many people whose work ensures that the parliamentary institution functions and, I believe, functions well. Of course, like him, I convey seasonal greetings to those very important people, the people of Australia. As he pointed out, 1979 has been a difficult year for many Australians and I would hope that 1 980 brings about the sorts of developments for which government can contribute very largely that will allow prosperity, too long escaped, to be recaptured for the benefit of the Australian community. There is literally a multitude of people working in this establishment and in other places nearby in association with this establishment who ensure that the parliamentary system does work. Their efforts, meshed together in a smooth, synchronised way, bring about a marked efficiency and impact on what we are doing. Too often they are unnoticed and most often unsung in the efforts that they contribute. An occasion like this, once a year, does at least allow us to recall the value of their efforts and how dependent we are upon them. I do not think it puts the issue too high to say that in many respects we are carried on their backs: I use that as a figure of speech. They are the spear carriers who do so much of the hard work that is not noted and certainly not celebrated but which allows us to get on with the very important task of government, of Opposition, of fulfilling our parliamentary functions.

I would not try to enumerate the various people, the various bodies which sustain this system in which we all work, but there are some people I do feel about whom I have to make some observation because their work is so proximate to where we are; the people in Hansard who assiduously record what we are saying and report us, thank God, not literally, but well; the Clerks of the House who sit there inscrutably, diligently recording the processes of the House, men of long memory but fortunately silent tongue. Mr Speaker, I have said some unkind things about you from time to time. I shall not take the opportunity to recall them. I am sure if you think it worth remembering them you will do so without any assistance from me. They are said- often in the passion of debate- most often because we feel at that time that they are justified. But on that point, if I can just dally a second, it is sometimes observed that there is some noise- more uncouth people might say a little disorder- in this parliamentary institution and people are a little aghast that it should happen.

However, I would suggest that it is a very important safety valve for the functioning of our system that people are able to generate that passion because they genuinely feel about an issue, and then allow it a healthy release in debate in this House. In other places they resort to the street; they resort to violence; and they resort to arms. Here we resort to words, sometimes elegantly, quite often I suspect somewhat brutally; nonetheless, it is part of the healthy processes of the institution.

Having said that, I had better say also, as I can almost see you blushing now, Mr Speaker- and might I add that the mild pink that is showing up contrasts well with the great white wig that you wear, and say also, for the benefit of my colleagues, that that is the only area where you become pink in politics- that you, Mr Speaker, have striven to contribute some dignity to the proceedings of the House. Generally, I would applaud what you are trying to do. I would not want my comments to be interpreted too widely.

There are some points that I would like to discuss, if not debate with you, in relation to the broader parliamentary reform. But can I say for the record: Thank goodness that someone is thinking about parliamentary reform. We desperately need to think about it in many other areas. I seem to recall that I said last year- but whether or not I did is not important and I say it for the record on this occasion- that there are many procedures that we follow in this House which are more relevant to a bygone age which represents a gap of a century or more between us and the things that were then appropriate. For instance, I do not believe that Question Time is any challenge for a reasonably intellectually agile Minister. I say that not in any sense of personal criticism of present Ministers to the exclusion of past Ministers. I speak from my own experience as a Minister. It is not a real test and it boils down to our trying to determine what we want to do in the parliamentary institution.

After having expressed some reservations initially, I believe that the move towards the estimate committee system seems to offer some opportunities for honourable members to make more constructive and concrete contributions to what the parliamentary system is about. I have said for many years in this institution- not regularly, but when the time has seemed appropriate- that we desperately need a more effective committee system functioning here. There is nothing more frustrating for a member of this Parliament than to sit on the back benches and to find that the greatest moment of glory, after extensive and diligent research- which can sometimes absorb days in the preparation of a speech- can be lost because he can be ruled out completely from speaking because of the compressed speaking time available; or after having delivered a very important and thoughtful speech which has more than just some significance to the affairs of state, finding that the best reward he can expect is a by-line or a few lines in a newspaper.

I have quoted often the experience that I had on a joint committee of inquiry into pharmaceutical benefits many years ago. I then discovered the enormous advantages of sitting away from this chamber which, by the predisposition of a debating chamber, tends to lock people into fixed positions very much like trench warfare in the First World War- many fusillades heavy bombardment, but not so much progress one side or the other in terms of moving backwards or forwards from the trenches. That committee allowed a break-up to take place, not so much on a bipartisan basis, but because the more progressive people in the conservative coalition were able to support people like myself, when we put forward constructive views, and, as more conservative people in the coalition found an odd ally from our side. In the less dramatic and less contrived situation where reflection and hard work are important it seems to me that the Committee system, developed much more extensively, has a great deal to offer our parliamentary institution and the nation. Our parliamentary institution was developed in a much earlier time. We live in a much more complex and technologically demanding age than when the parliamentary institution was at its peak. It is impossible for us properly to attend, in all of the detail which we should apply ourselves to our task, to the many things that come into this Parliament.

I am going off in a different direction and I suspect that I am starting to challenge you, Mr Speaker, as the sort of parliamentary reformer of the moment. I know better than to do that, having had enough trouble with you this year. You might be unkind enough to say that you have had more than enough trouble with me. I merely want to say that I regard this as a very important institution, and one which is capable of a great deal of improvement. Mr Speaker, I congratulate you on what you are trying to do. The fact is that you are opening debate.

There are so many other people here whom I have not been able to mention. I think of the attendants in the House who are ever cheerful, diligent and helpful. The attendants outside the House, the people in the Papers Office, the people in the Library, the people who look after the amenities in the various parts of the Parliamentary Refreshment Rooms and so on. We just could not function without them. We are extremely grateful to them. But, most of all, when we stand here on this occasion we are most grateful to the people of Australia. To all those people, the people who keep us going, the people of this great country, we convey seasonal greetings.

Mr SPEAKER:

-I thank honourable gentlemen for comments they have made which join in the spirit of goodwill to us all and to those who serve us. This is the 24th valedictory debate that I have heard. I find that they have been improving. They used to be called hypocrisies but today I heard nothing hypocritical and that means that they have improved a great deal. We come here elected by the people of Australia.

The sovereignty of the people of Australia belongs to each and every one of them. They cannot exercise it individually and, therefore, they must have a system of entrusting the sovereignty to others; and that is the democratic parliamentary system in which we are elected, by a group of people in Australia, to come here and speak for them and represent them. We must speak fearlessly, without favour or hope for favour.

In this Parliament the truth must be spoken, the truth must be demanded, for only in that way will we fully discharge our obligation to the people of Australia. That is why I am so keen about parliamentary reform. In that way, we can ensure that what we do today fully answers the requirements of the people of Australia, so that every individual member of the Parliament can contribute to the fullest extent of his intellectual capacity, his experience, and the passion with which he holds views. The Leader of the Opposition mentioned something upon which I wish to comment, that is, that I often receive letters from people who complain about the behaviour of the House because of its noise. Often there is good reason for it, but more often there is not good reason for it because nobody comes here by invitation. Everybody who is here came here by his own effort and by his own capacity to persuade people that he can properly represent them and, therefore, when issues arise which they hold passionately they will certainly express their views passionately and strongly; and that is to be expected. There are some ‘parliaments of the world ‘ which are perfectly behaved, but they are not parliaments which in any way hold the sovereignty of the people. They are parliaments which are controlled by non-elected people. For that reason, we must take our parliamentary institution with all its faults, but ever attempt to make it a better place in which to discharge our duties.

It has been a significant year for parliamentary reform because, for the first time, we have adopted Estimates committees. Last year was a great year because, for the first time, we adopted legislation committees. I have already circulated a paper which indicated how much more time was available to the Parliament as a result of the Estimates committees. I also make the point that, whilst this is a theatre of political debate and political point scoring, when members of this Parliament are in committee it is remarkable how they can agree with each other and give unanimous recommendations which are in everybody’s interests. The year 1978 was legislation committees; the year 1979 was Estimates committees; and I very strongly hope that 1980 will be the year of the adoption of the Westminster convention of the independent Speaker.

I also thank the Chairman of Committees, my deputy, the honourable member for Wide Bay, Mr Clarrie Millar, who is a most reliable deputy and who is well respected by the House. I thank his Deputy Chairmen-Mr Armitage, Mr Dobie, Mr Drummond, Mr Giles, Mr Jarman, Dr Jenkins, Mr Martin and Mr Ian Robinson. I thank the Clerks. The Clerk of the House is called ‘the little pet’ in my office. I think it is a contraction of his name. It has nothing to do with his character because he used to fly multi-engine aeroplanes over the Atlantic during the war. I also thank his staff. I thank Hansard. There is the story about the man who said: ‘I want to be reported as I am ‘. Twenty minutes later he got the report back and it contained a single sentence. He changed his mind and he wanted to be reported as the Hansard staff edit us. I thank them for that.

I thank the Library staff. I see Mr Weir the Librarian sitting in the chamber. The Library is no longer a library in the way we understand it. It is an intellectual resource that services all back bench members of the Parliament and especially the front bench of the Opposition. Mr Weir, I regret to inform the House but not with any melancholy tone to my voice, needs to have an operation on his eye next week. He has put off that operation so that he could service us. I know he has been under very considerable personal strain as a result and I take this opportunity, on behalf of the House, to assure him of our good wishes for a successful operation.

I thank the Joint House people who look after us extremely well- the girls in the dining room, the men and girls in the kitchen and the men in the bar, although I think there are some ladies there too. Of course, few of us would know about that latter part but all of us know about the eating part. We thank them and we thank the attendants, the people who maintain order here when we are unable to do so. The attendants stand ready to back up the Serjeant-at-arms if ever he has to eject somebody from the chamber. I express my thanks to my own personal staff also. They are deserving of tremendous praise from me. Having been kind to people here I leave the chamber often and am unkind to my staff. I would like them all to accept the fact that on occasions I have to make a little protest to somebody and they, unfortunately, have to hear it. I might say that as a result of the efforts of the members here this morning, when I returned to my office after leaving the chair, I was a little bad tempered, and I hope my staff will excuse me for that.

Finally, I ask all honourable members to continue the practice that they have adopted this year, and that is of spending the first half hour of their waking day thinking about how they can be kind to the Speaker. If they continue with that practice we will have a very good year in 1980.I wish everybody the best for Christmas and the New Year.

Mr UREN:
Reid

– I realise that the time is late. I thought you would adjourn the House at six o’clock, Mr Speaker. I do not want to delay the House. First of all, I wanted to make a speech today during the Grievance Debate or at some other time but for some reason or another it always seems to be very difficult for back bench members to make speeches. That is a protest that should be expressed a little more often. The time is late, so I am not going to make a speech. I want to thank those officers and staff of the Parliament who have been so kind to me. The honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones) and I have been members of this House for 21 years today. It was on 22 November 1958 that we were first elected to Parliament. During that time my service, at least- I am not speaking for Charlie- has been controversial from time to time both inside and outside the House. However, I have received nothing but courtesy from the officers and staff of this Parliament.

I thank also the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Anthony) for mentioning particularly those people in Indo-China and the people of East Timor. We in Australia are in a more fortunate country than those people. We are certainly not going through the trials and tribulations that those people are suffering in this time of goodwill to all men. This Parliament has to look at the farreaching policies of the 1980s to overcome what we call the curse of unemployment which exists in this country and which affects so many unfortunate people in our community.

Today I wanted to talk about the report of the Australian Ionising Radiation Advisory Council which clearly stated that there is no solution to the problems of nuclear waste. However, I will put my comments on record in a Press statement. I thank the House for its patience. I again thank the officers and staff of the Parliament for being so kind to me during the last 2 1 years.

Mr VINER (Stirling-Leader of the House)With your indulgence, Mr Speaker: I omitted to thank one person and I might do that now. I want to thank my friend and colleague, the Deputy Leader of the House, the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs (Mr Fife). I thank him warmly for the assistance he has given me since I have been Leader of the House.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 3420

LEAVE OF ABSENCE TO ALL MEMBERS

Motion (by Mr Viner) agreed to:

That leave of absence be given to every member of the House of Representatives from the determination of this sitting of the House to the date of its next sitting.

House adjourned at 6.13 p.m. until Tuesday, 19 February next, at 2.15 p.m., unless Mr Speaker shall fix an alternative day or hour of meeting or, in the incapacity or absence from Australia of Mr Speaker, the Chairman of Committees may fix an alternative day or hour, such alternative day or hour of meeting to be notified by telegram or letter addressed to each Member of the House.

page 3421

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

The following answers to questions were circulated:

Department of Housing and Construction (Question No. 4961)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 18 October 1979:

  1. How many new apprentices has his Department recruited in each year since 1974-75 and how many have obtained employment with the Department.
  2. What proportion of (a) construction and (b) repair and maintenance work was carried out by (i) contract and (ii) his Department’s day labour force in each of the last 3 years and in each case what expenditure was incurred.
  3. What sums (a) were spent in 1 978-79 and (b) are appropriated in 1979-80 by the Commonwealth for research and development in the use of energy in buildings.
  4. What are the details of the purposes for which these sums were or are to be expended.
  5. How many (a) engineers, (b) architects, (c) quantity surveyors, (d) trainees and cadets and (e) draftsmen and technical officers were employed in his Department as at 30 June in each of the last 5 years.
Mr Groom:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. The Department’s intake of apprentices was as follows:

1974-75-213; 1975-76-150; 1976-77-121; 1977-78-137; 1978-79-125.

Those who satisfactorily completed their apprenticeships and who opted to remain with the Department have been retained in employment; however apprentices are not guaranteed employment on completion of their apprenticeship.

  1. Statistics are not available prior to 1976-77. Figures for the last 3 years are as follows:
  1. Within my portfolio funds are not specifically appropriated or earmarked for research and development in the use of energy in buildings. However, sums for those purposes (a) spent in 1978-79 and (b) to be expended in 1979-80 by my Department and by bodies within my portfolio are as follows:

Department of Housing and Construction:

  1. approx. $100,000 spent in 1978-79-expenditure on salaries, overheads and cash payments
  2. approx. $150,000 to be expended in 1979-80- ‘inhouse’ salaries.

Australian Housing and Research Council: funded equally by the Commonwealth and States to a total of $200,000 for each of 1 978-79 and 1 979-80, from which total:

  1. $22,541 spent in 1978-79.
  2. $69,814 to be expended in 1979-80.

It should be noted that other Commonwealth bodies and agencies outside the portfolio of Housing and Construction (e.g. CSIRO and the National Energy Research, Development and Demonstration Council) are also involved in the field of energy research and development

  1. Department of Housing and Construction:

Investigations into the application and economies of solar powered building cooling systems and assistance to the Standards Association of Australia with evaluation and test methods for solar hot water heaters.

Assistance to sponsors with the better formulation of their design briefs and building management practices to achieve better use of money and energy.

Australian Housing Research Council:

Investigation of thermal performance of dwellings.

(5)-

On 1 July 1978, 59 engineers, 7 architects, 1 quantity surveyor, 3 trainees and cadets and 83 draftsmen and technical officers transferred to the Northern Territory Public Service.

On 31 August 1979, 4 engineers, 1 architect and 4 draftsmen and technical officers transferred to the Northern Territory Public Service.

On 1 January 1979, 9 engineers, 5 architects, 4 quantity surveyors, 1 1 draftsmen and technical officers and 4 trainees and cadets transferred to the Northern Territory Public Service.

In total during the 1978-79 financial year 72 engineers, 13 architects, 5 quantity surveyors, 98 draftsmen and technical officers and 7 trainees and cadets were transferred to the Northern Territory Public Service.

In addition, 4 engineers, 4 architects, 1 quantity surveyor, 14 draftsmen and technical officers and 3 trainees and cadets transferred on 1 July 1979.

Air Navigation Charges (Question No. 4970)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 23 October 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Can he state for each year from and including 1 97 1 -72 and estimates for 1979-80 the percentage recovery from air na vigation charges of (a) domestic airline operations, (b) domestic general aviation operations, (c) overseas commercial operations and (d) overseas charter operations.
  2. Can he also state the average subsidy from the Government per passenger for passenger operations for (a) domestic passenger movements and (b) overseas passenger movements for each of the same years.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

The recovery rates achieved by the sectors of the aviation industry are available in respect of 1974-75 to 1977-78 inclusive only. Further, the information for the two years 1974-75 and 1975-76 is based on preliminary financial results for those years.

The recovery rates given in answer to pan (1) of the honourable member’s question, are based on air navigation charges revenue only. When considering the level of cost recovery in the air transport industry, it is the practice to bring to account other attributable revenues such as customs duty and excise paid on aviation fuels, rents, concessionaires’ licence fees etc. These revenues represent about 54 per cent and 48 per cent of the total attributable revenue in 1974-75 and 1977-78 respectively and have been taken into account in answering pan (2 ) of the question.

Overseas charter operations are not taken out separately and are included in the Other General Aviation Sector.

Consumption of Tobacco (Question No. 4974)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 23 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Further to his answer to Question No. 4377 (Hansard, 9 October 1979, page 1801) in which he indicated that he was unable to say what was the annual per capita consumption of tobacco in Australia, is he able to say:

    1. what the annual production of tobacco in Australia was for the years 1969 to 1978 inclusive;
    2. what quantity of Australian produced tobacco was exported for each of those years;
    3. what quantity of the annual crop was unused in those years; and
    4. taking account of the figures in pans (a), (b) and (c) and dividing the final figure by the estimated population in Australia in each of those years would he then be able to provide an answer to my original question; if not, why not.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. No definitive record is kept of when tobacco from any crop is used.

No complete record is maintained of unused leaf which does not come forward for manufacture.

The suggested computation using the above figures will not accurately reflect the per capita consumption of tobacco products in Australia as, amongst other things, it does not take into account:

  1. ) the difference between the weight of unmanufactured tobacco leaf and the weight of the manufactured product.

    1. imports of unmanufactured tobacco.
    2. imports or manufactured tobacco products.
    3. that usage does not necessarily reflect that year’s leaf production, since a marketing quota determines manufacturers’ uptake in any year.
    4. that a per head consumption figure depends on the age groups of population selected.

No official Australian agency publishes regular figures on the age distribution of smokers.

The following information may prove useful to the honourable member

Fishing Agreement with Japan (Question No. 4977)

Dr Everingham Asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 23 October 1979:

Did the fishing agreement with Japan signed in October 1979 involve fishing grounds in which Torres Strait Islanders have an interest.

Does the border agreement with Papua New Guinea guarantee Torres Strait Islanders prior consultation before disposal of their traditional resources.

What consultations have occurred or will occur and what compensation or share in the Government revenue involved has been requested by, or offered to, Torres Strait Islanders.

Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. The Australia/ Japan Subsidiary Agreement on Japanese tuna longline fishing in the Australian fishing zone, signed on 17 October 1979, excludes theoperation of Japanese tuna longline vessels from the area of the Protected Zone to be established under the Torres Strait Treaty.
  2. 2 ) Article 20 ( 1 ) of the Torres Strait Treaty provides that Protected Zone commercial fisheries will be administered so as not to prejudice the traditional fishing activities of the Torres Strait Islanders. Article 26 (4) of the Treaty requires the Parties to consult the traditional inhabitants of the area on licensing arrangements in respect of Protected Zone commercial fisheries. The Government will not be concluding any fishing agreements which allow foreign boats to operate in the Protected Zone area unless the consultation process envisaged in Article 26 (4) of the Treaty has been carried out and the concurrence of the responsible authorities of both Australia and Papua New Guinea has been obtained in accordance with Article 27 of the Treaty.
  3. There were extensive consultations on the Treaty arrangements with the Torres Strait Islanders prior to signature of the Treaty on 18 December 1978. We are not currently engaged in any fisheries negotiations with foreign countries to which consultations on the matters raised by the honourable member would be relevant.

Oil Exploration (Question No. 4983)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 24 October 1979:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to a report in the Financial Review of15 October 1979 which claimed that an oil exploration company, Metals and Energy Minerals, has decided to defer a $1 million share issue until certain doubts are clarified on the Government’s budget decision to allow tax rebates for funds subscribed for onshore oil exploration.
  2. If so, what substance is there in this report and is it a fact that many genuine exploration companies will be disqualified from claiming the rebate because explorers operating under farm-in arrangements will be precluded.
  3. In view of the need for more oil exploration in Australia, and in view of the fact that most Australian explorers operate on relatively small budgets, will he act urgently to ensure that fund-raising and genuine exploration expenditure by oil explorers is not delayed by uncertainties over the rebate scheme or inhibited by over-restrictive legislation.
Mr Howard:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (l)Yes. (2)I have been advised that the company concerned decided to defer a share issue pending clarification of certain doubts as to the scope of the proposed onshore rebate scheme.

The report does, however, misrepresent the operation of the offshore rebate scheme under section160ACA of the Income Tax Assessment Act, where it suggests that only companies that hold current licences or permits issued under the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act may lodge declarations for the purpose of conferring rebate entitlements for capital subscribed by their shareholders. In fact the law also permits companies holding a registered interest in such licences or permits to make declarations for that purpose.

Thus companies that have entered into agreements to acquire an interest by way of a farm-in arrangement can lodge valid declarations provided the farm-in agreement has been approved and appropriately registered by the Designated Authority appointed under the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act.

The announced extension of the offshore rebate scheme to companies carrying on petroleum exploration and development operations onshore is to apply in the same way. Companies holding current onshore petroleum exploration or mining licences, permits, leases, rights or interests therein are issued and registered under State mining laws will be able to take advantage of the concession. Where the State law does not provide for registration of transfers of interests such as farm-in agreements a pre-requisite to a company’s eligibility to participate in the onshore rebate scheme will be that the appropriate State Minister or his delegate has formally approved the transfer or farm-in agreement in writing.

  1. The offshore shareholder rebate scheme is not unduly restrictive. Its extension onshore should not create undue problems for petroleum exploration and mining companies. Such restrictions as do exist are necessary safeguards against the practices which developed under the earlier shareholder concessions when companies raised capital without any firm commitment for its expenditure on petroleum exploration and without any clear prospect of obtaining a licence or permit or an interest therein.

Legislation to extend the offshore rebate scheme to onshore petroleum exploration and development will be introduced as soon as it is practicable to do so within the context of the Government’s heavy legislative program on taxation matters.

Hospital Insurance: Tax Deductions (Question No. 5008)

Dr Klugman:
PROSPECT, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 25 October 1979:

Are premiums paid to life insurance companies, for hospital insurance policies, a tax deduction as claimed on page 1 of the ‘Voluntary Health Insurance Association of Australia Bulletin of October 1979.

Mr Howard:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

No. Such premiums are not allowable deductions. Nor do they qualify as expenditure in respect of which concessional rebates may be allowed.

Diethyl Stilbestrol (Question No. 5039)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

  1. Is diethyl stilbestrol used in meat and poultry production.
  2. If so, is there evidence of its possible consumption by those eating the meat products.
  3. Can he say whether its use as a stock feed has been banned in the United States of America.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. No. In the early 1960’s, State authorities moved to control the sale and use of diethyl stilbestrol (DES) and other oestrogens for animal production purposes in accordance with a recommendation from the Australian Agricultural Council. Veterinarians were, however, permitted to continue use of these drugs for strictly therapeutic purposes in treating individual animals.
  2. See(l).
  3. According to the most recent advice available to the Department of Primary Industry, a complete ban on the use of DES as an animal growth promotant in the United States of America was due to take effect from 1 November 1979.

Nabarlek: Alpha-radiation (Question No. 5043)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 7 November 1 979:

  1. What units are used by the Australian Radiation Laboratories for measuring levels of alpha-radiation of the miners and other exposed workers at Nabarlek.
  2. What are the (a) mean and (b) highest exposure levels of alpha-radiation measured to date of the air in the breathing zone of employees at Nabarlek whose work takes them into areas of significant radiation.
  3. Will he supply estimates of the (a) mean and (b) highest dosages of alpha-radiation in these employees over the life of the mine, measured in working level months, where one working level = 1.3 x 10’ MeV of potential alpha energy per litre of air.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. The Australian Radiation Laboratory (ARL) measures radon daughter concentrations in units of working level.
  2. For an open pit, the circumstances when radon daughters occur at significant levels are those occasions when there is poor natural ventilation. This happens in practice during times of strong temperature inversion when there is no vertical air movement, and the air becomes very still. Radon gas, emerging from the ore surface then remains in the immediate area for long enough to decay into radon daughters. Significant radon daughter levels are therefore only likely to occur during the night and in particular at times close to sunset and sunrise.

The ARL maintained a continuous measurement program throughout the active mining phase at Nabarlek, during which radon daughter levels in the pit were regularly recorded. During the daylight hours they were observed to be quite negligible, and even at night time turned out to be lower than expected. Prior to August 1979 there were very few occurrences of temperature inversions, and no significant levels were observed until then. For the month of August, which happened to be the time when the highest grade of ore was removed from the pit, the maximum recorded level was 0.27 working level observed over a 10 minute interval just before sunrise. Such sharp and shortlived peaks in radon daughter concentration were not uncommon during this period. The mean level for night times during August and September was 0.02S + 0.004 WL, and essentially zero for the day shifts. In general, ARL estimates agree reasonably with the independent measurements made by the mining company.

  1. It is not possible for ARL to provide estimates of the highest total exposures as it does not have records for the individual hours worked by employees. The company has however reported its estimates to the Northern Territory Department of Mines and Energy which is the supervising authority. ARL can however estimate the mean total radon daughter exposure, based on its measurements of radon daughter levels and the number and length of day and night shifts worked per month, once inversion conditions began to occur.

Estimated mean exposure from 1 August 1979 to the close of mining on 1 1 October 1979 is 0.06 working level months (WLM) which compares well with the company’s estimate of 0.05 WLM. This should be compared with the maximum exposure permitted under the Code of Practice on Radiation Protection in the Mining and Milling of Radioactive Ores ( 1 975 ) of 4 WLM in a full year.

Iwasaki Sangyo Co: Land Purchases (Question No. 5051)

Mr Holding:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to allegations of a Queensland grazier, Mr Stan Kelly, that representatives of the Iwasaki Sangyo Co. endeavoured to acquire freehold land adjacent to the Iwasaki franchise.

    1. Does the Iwasaki Sangyo Co. need Federal Government approval to negotiate more land deals and specifically for any expansion north of the existing franchise.
    2. Has Iwasaki Sangyo sought or been granted Federal Government permission to acquire more land; if not, is he concerned about reports that the company has been negotiating for more land, and what action does he propose to take to deal with this situation.
Mr Howard:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. and (2) Yes. (3)1 refer the honourable member to the answer to Question No. 2082 on page 2035 of the Senate Hansard of 7 November 1979.

Institute of Cultural Affairs: Model Project at Murrin Bridge (Question No. 5055)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 8 November 1 979:

What Aboriginal monitoring and appraisal will be provided by the Institute of Cultural Affairs and/or by governments in the Institute ‘s model project at Murrin Bridge.

Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I have approved a Community Health Program grant to the Institute in respect of its Murrin Bridge project. This grant is in respect of salaries and associated costs for two community health development staff to provide the Murrin Bridge Aboriginal community with community health development services covering matters such as hygiene, sanitation and nutrition, and including personal and community health promotion.

My approval is subject to a special condition that the project organisers and staff shall closely co-operate with New South Wales health and welfare authorities and officers in relation to the operation of this project. The Institute has also been advised that, if the project is approved for continued funding next financial year, it should be expected that this will be subject to an additional special condition to the effect that the project shall be subject to joint Commonwealth/ State appraisal; it is implicit in this that the community will be consulted.

No appointments have yet been made to the two positions approved for Community Health Program funding.

Medibank Claims (Question No. 5076)

Mr James:
HUNTER, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 13 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Are claims lodged at Medibank offices in Woden, Australian Capital Territory, processed in Canberra and then forwarded to Sydney for checking before the claimant can receive the refund.
  2. 2 ) What is the purpose of this procedure and when was it instigated.
  3. What is the average waiting period for a claimant before a refund cheque is posted.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. to (3) Medibank Private is a registered hospital and medical benefits organisation and operates in competition with other private funds. While the Health Insurance Commission is a statutory authority, the Government does not issue instructions as to how Medibank Private business is conducted other than through instructions which apply equally to all other registered funds.

It will be appreciated that publishing information of the nature sought, relating as it does to Medibank Private procedures and practices, might be to the commercial disadvantage of the fund. Therefore I have asked the General Manager of the Health Insurance Commission to provide the information direct to the honourable member on a confidential basis.

Postal Charges (Question No. 1681)

Mr Clyde Cameron:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 15 August 1978:

Will he give the Parliament a copy of the submission proposing the recent 1 1 per cent increase in postal charges.

Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

There were several submissions to me from the Australian Postal Commission dealing with the July 1978 increases in postal charges which were of a deliberative, policy formulation nature. In order to preserve the confidentiality of advice between me as Minister and my Department and the authorities for which I am responsible, I do not believe that these submissions should be made public. -> I can say, however, that the public statement of 1 June 1978 by the Acting Chairman of the Australian Postal Commission outlined the main impact on the finances of Australia Post of the increase in postal rates which operated from 1 July 1978. More detailed reasons for the increases are given in the Commission’s ‘Service and Business Outlook for 1978-79’ and the Annual Report of the Australian Postal Commission for the year ended 30 June 1978 which have been tabled in Parliament.

North West One Stop Welfare Centre (Question No. 4006)

Mr Howe:
BATMAN, VICTORIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 28 May 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the current status of the North West one stop Welfare Centre (the NOW Centre).
  2. What has been the outcome of the most recent review of this centre.
  3. Will provision be made for further one stop welfare centres.
  4. Will the Minister establish a one stop welfare centre in the City of Northcote, Victoria.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) The North West one stop Welfare Centre at Coburg, Victoria, is continuing as a co-ordinated welfare delivery outlet.
  2. The recent review of the operation of the Centre indicated that the Centre as it had been organised was effective in co-ordinating the welfare delivery efforts of various government and non-government organisations. The review recommended continuation of the Centre.
  3. and (4) The question of establishment of further one stop welfare centres will be considered in the light of particular circumstances as they arise. This applies also to the question of whether there should be such a centre in the city of Northcote.

Industrial Relations: Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Question No. 4315)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 7 June 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the total volume of fuel consumed per annum by motor vehicles operated by his Department and statutory authorities and business undertakings under his control.
  2. What is the annual cost of fuel consumed by motor vehicles referred to in part ( 1 ).
Mr Street:
Minister for Industrial Relations · CORANGAMITE, VICTORIA · LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) I refer the honourable member to the Minister for National Development’s answer to Question No. 4328 (House of Representatives Hansard, 6 November 1979, pages 2657-8).

Business and Consumer Affairs: Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Question No. 4332)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 7 June 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the total volume of fuel consumed per annum by motor vehicles operated by his Department and statutory authorities and business undertakings under his control.
  2. ) What is the annual cost of fuel consumed by motor vehicles referred to in part ( 1 ).
Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to the Minister for National Development’s reply to Question No. 4328 (Hansard, 6 November 1979, page 2657).

Broadcasting and Television Services in Central Queensland (Question No. 4352)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 2 1 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has the Government made a commitment to end the isolation of those living in remote areas and to improve country broadcasting and television services.
  2. Was a licence granted to the Moore-Allen group to provide a radio broadcasting service to Emerald, Queensland, 18 months ago; if so, why is the service not yet in operation.
  3. Will he ensure that when the broadcasting service begins operation (a) it is oriented to the particular needs of the Emerald community and (b) is not merely a relay service from another centre.
  4. Is March 1980 the most optimistic forecast for the provision of a commercial television service for Emerald and the central highlands of Queensland.
  5. Did television station RTQ7, Rockhampton Television Limited, first write to the Australian Broadcasting Control Board on 29 January 1970 asking to extend its television service to the Emerald and central highlands area; if so, what is the reason for the delay in providing the service.
  6. When will the Australian Broadcasting Commission television service be extended to the people of Moranbah and Dysart, Queensland.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Commitments made by the Government include:

    1. use of Intelsat IV for the provision of national services to remote communities;
    2. b) on-going extension of the national services by off-air translators and terrestrial links;
    3. the recent announcement of the Government’s decision to establish a domestic communications satellite system in Australia.

  2. A licence for a commercial broadcasting station to serve the Emerald area of Queensland, was granted to Emerald Broadcasting Company Pty Ltd on 22 December 1977. Licences for Broadcasting Translator stations to serve the Dysart and Moranbah areas of Queensland were also granted to Emerald Broadcasting Company Pty Ltd on 22 December 1977.

Following legal action initiated by Barrier Reef Broadcasting Pty Ltd, licensee of commercial broadcasting station 4MK Mackay, the translator licences were subsequently held by the High Court of Australia to be null and void.

Mr F. T. Moore, Managing Director of Emerald Broadcasting Company Pty Ltd has indicated that his Company will not proceed with the Emerald station until the position in respect of the translator licences is clarified.

  1. Following the High Court decision, I have taken the opportunity to review planning of broadcasting services in the region, and I expect to be inviting applications for additional services in the near future. In this review of planning, and in the light of representations received, I have paid particular attention to the need for local programming and the need to establish a viable service. Both questions will certainly also be considered by the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal in its public inquiry prior to the grant of translator licences for the area. (4)I expect to invite applications for licences for television translator licences to serve this area within the next three months. Having regard for the duration of the licensing process and the time involved in purchase of equipment and construction following the grant of licences, it could be anticipated that the service would come into operation during the latter half of 1980.
  2. Yes. However, I am unaware of the background to the delay by the Board in processing the application. Rockhampton Television Ltd first wrote to me on this subject in September 1978. Since that time all the necessary engineering studies of the area have been carried out by my D epartment, and the relevant planning proposal has been completed. Arrangements are now being made to submit the proposal to industry bodies for comment.
  3. The estimated dates for the provision of the national television services to Moranbah and Dysart are February 1980, and May 1980 respectively.

Bank Loans to Small Business (Question No. 4394)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce, upon notice, on 2 1 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is he able to say whether Trading Bank loan facilities made available to small businesses in 1977-78 constituted 36.5 per cent in value of the total facilities available for lending.
  2. Do small businesses account for 56 per cent of private sector employment; if so, do the loan facilities made available to them fall far short of this percentage.
  3. Has his attention been drawn to a statement made by Mr E. Colledge, a leading financial consultant to the automotive industry, that local trading banks are consistently failing the vital small business sector, in that the most common response of bank managers to requests for additional funds by small business people, is to refer them to the bank’s whollyowned or affiliated finance company where funds are available at rates often in excess of 1 8 per cent.
  4. If the position is as stated, will he institute discussions with the Minister for Finance and the Treasurer to ensure that adequate funds are made available to the banking system by way of Statutory Reserve Deposits which could be let out at reasonable rates of interest to small businesses.
Mr Lynch:
Minister for Industry and Commerce · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The Small Business Development Council of New South Wales, in its submission to the Committee of Inquiry into the Australian Financial System (Campbell Committee) claimed that trading bank loan facilities made available to small businesses in 1 977-78 constituted 36.5 per cent in value of the total facilities available for lending and that small businesses account for 56 per cent of private employment: I am not aware of the basis for either claim. During the current Campbell Committee inquiry the Australian Bankers Association estimated that about 40 per cent by value of all business loans by the Banks were to small businesses. The discrepancy in these figures does not appear to be large and may be due to the use of different criteria to establish a definition of a ‘small’ business.
  2. Based on the commonly accepted definition of a small business as being one employing less than 100 in manufacturing and less than 20 in non-manufacturing, the Department of Industry and Commerce estimate that small firms employ about 40 per cent of total private employment. On this basis estimates of the proportion of business loans going to small business given in ( 1 ) above indicate that there is no such shortfall.

However the demands which businesses make on the banks for loan funds depend on a number of factors besides the size of their wage payments and there is no basis, either in theory or practice, for expecting a particular sector’s share of trading bank finance to equate with that sector’s share of total employment.

  1. Yes.
  2. The Government’s policy that adequate finance should be made available to small business and that no arbitrary limits should be placed on such finance has been conveyed to financial institutions.

New arrangements for term lending by the trading banks emphasize the availability of such loans to the small business sector and the terms for such loans have been extended from three to ten years (previously three to eight years).

There has also been a significant increase in lending by the Commonwealth Development Bank since its charter was extended in June 1978 to allow it to lend to all kinds of business. In the year ended 30th June 1979 the value of non-rural loan approvals was $29.2m compared with $15. lm in the previous year; of this increase $8.7m or 62 per cent went to business undertakings in sectors which were previously outside the Bank’s charter.

In the Budget speech, the Treasurer reaffirmed that the Government’s monetary policy is directed at providing adequate funds for sustainable expansion in private sector activity and employment while continuing to bear down steadily on inflation and inflationary expectations. The allocation of the available credit among particular sectors is a matter for the commercial judgment of lenders. However the Banks have on several occasions reaffirmed to the Reserve Bank that they: apply the same lending criteria to all business customers whether large or small do not discriminate against applications for loans to small businesses which by number are the bulk of their business continuously review lending criteria.

The SRD mechanism is an instrument of monetary and banking policy: its essential role is that of influencing the liquidity base of the banking system: it is not a device for the channelling of funds into particular forms of lending.

Status of Forces Agreements (Question No. 4420)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 22 August 1 979:

Will he bring up to date his answer to question No. 341 concerning Status of Forces Agreements and Reciprocal Claims Agreements ( Hansard, 2 May 1978, page 1663).

Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Since my answer to the honourable member’s question none of the agreements then under negotiation has yet been concluded. The status of the various negotiations is currently under review by the Departments of Foreign Affairs and Defence.

Social Security: Migrant Programs and Policies (Question No. 4441)

Dr Cass:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 22 August 1979:

  1. For what programs and policies concerning immigrants has the Department of Social Security been responsible in each year from 1970 to date.
  2. What was the expenditure on each program and policy.
  3. What proportion of the Department’s administrative expenses are estimated to cover the programs and policies.
  4. On what dates did the transfer of responsibility for programs and policies referred to in part ( 1 ) to or from the Department of Social Security take effect.
  5. To which or from which Departments were these transfers of responsibilities made.
  6. Why were these transfers made.
  7. With what other Federal or State Government Departments or authorities does the Department of Social Security share responsibility for the programs and policies referred to in part (1).
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

– The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) From 2 October 1974 to 20 December 1977, when the then Migrant Services Branch was located within my Department, the following programs were exclusively directed towards migrants:

Welfare Services

Telephone Interpreter Service

Good Neighbour Councils

Grants to organisations involved in integration activities/migrant welfare activities

Repatriation of immigrants to their former countries

Research and surveys in immigrant settlement experience

National Group Directory .

Migrant Social Welfare Advisory Council

Co-ordination of Refugee Settlement

Guardianship of immigrant Children.

All Social Security programs, including payments under the Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act and special benefits for people under maintenance guarantees and for refugees, cover migrants insofar as migrants are members of the Australian community. Special attention has been given to programs and policies affecting migrants in line with recommendations of the Galbally Report.

Since 1974 information material on social security programs and services has been printed in ethnic languages. Currently pamphlets in 18 ethnic languages are available and it is proposed to include additional ethnic languages this financial year.

Since December 1978 a separate migrant services section has been concerned with policies and programs of the Department to ensure they are attuned to the needs of migrants.

Subsequently, in August 1979, migrant services units have been established in each State Office of my Department.

  1. Details on expenditure by the Department of Social Security from 1974 to 1977 for programs and policies specifically concerning migrants administered by the Migrant Services Branch were as follows:
  1. Since 20 December 1977, my Department has not been responsible for programs which are exclusively directed towards migrants. In respect of general programs, to which migrants have access, estimates of current administrative expenses relating to services to migrants only are not available because of the multi-program responsibilities of a large number of officers.
  2. Responsibility for post-arrival services for migrants was transferred to the Department of Social Security on 2 October 1974 and transferred from the Department on 20 December 1977.
  3. The Migrant Services Branch was transferred from the then Department of Immigration to the Department of Social Security and subsequently to the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs.
  4. Government decision to change administrative arrangements.
  5. None. Consultation and liaison are maintained with a number of Australian Government Departments, State Government Departments, local authorities, ethnic communities and voluntary organisations.

Aboriginal Affairs: Miscellaneous Relief Vote (Question No. 4489)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice, on 28 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) What sums were (a) allocated and (b) expended in (i) urban and (ii) rural areas, in the miscellaneous relief vote in the Northern Territory in each year since 1967.
  2. Has the allocation declined in size; if so, why.
Mr Ellicott:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1) and (2) The question relates to responsibilities carried out by various Commonwealth Departments from 1967 to 30 June 1978 including the Departments of the Interior, Northern Territory and Northern Australia. The Northern Territory Government assumed responsibility for these matters on 1 July 1978 and the operational records relating to them were passed to that Government.

Consequently, the information required is not available in an accessible form and my Department’s Darwin Office does not have the resources to retrieve and compile this information.

Aboriginal Welfare Officers (Question No. 4491)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice, on 28 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many Aborigines have been recruited as welfare officers in the Department of the Northern Territory Development Branch and its successors in each year since 1 970.
  2. What scales of maximum assistance were (a) laid down and (b) made public, and when.
Mr Ellicott:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) The question relates to responsibilities carried out by various Commonwealth Departments from 1970 to 30 June 1978 including the Departments of the Interior, Northern Territory and Northern Australia. The Northern Territory Government assumed responsibility for these matters on 1 July 1978 and the operational records relating to them were passed to that Government.

Consequently, the information required is not available in an accessible form and my Department ‘s Darwin Office does not have the resources to retrieve and compile this information.

Foster Parents for Aborigines (Question No. 4492)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice, on 28 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) Do Northern Territory authorities make children State wards before making fostering payments to relatives or others.
  2. Are non-Aboriginals preferred as foster parents for Aborigines.
Mr Ellicott:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) The matter raised in this question relates to the administration by the Northern Territory Government of the relevant Northern Territory legislation for which responsibility passed to that Government on I July 1978. It is therefore entirely a matter for that Government.

Broadcast Telecast (Question No. 4659)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 18 September 1979:

  1. When does he propose to answer my question No. 3332.
  2. Is it a fact that the introduction of broadcast teletext has been delayed still further since I placed question No. 3332 on notice on 1 March 1979.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. ) House of Representatives Hansard of 18 September 1979, page 1248 refers.
  2. See my reply to part 7 of Question No. 3332 in the Hansard indicated above.

Stilboestrol (Question Na 4688)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 1 9 September 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Have any tests on the hormone drug Stilboestrol been carried out in Australia; if so, by whom and when; if not, what evidence or tests were the basis of its acceptance as safe for use in Australia.
  2. For women who now find themselves or their children suffering from the effects of Stilboestrol, is it the Government, the doctor or the drug manufacturer who takes responsibility for their predicament.
  3. Will the Government establish a register of these women.
  4. Has Stilboestrol ever been used for feeding animals and poultry in Australia as has been the case in the United States of America; if so, is it still being used in feed for cattle, pigs, sheep or poultry.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. No. Stilboestrol was introduced onto the Australian market in the late 1940 ‘s and early 1950 ‘s before the introduction of controls over the safety and efficacy of imported therapeutic substances.
  2. Adverse effects have been confirmed to some only of the offspring of women who were administered the drug during pregnancy.

The question as to who should take responsibility for the predicament of the children suffering from the effects of Stilboestrol is a vexed one. As indicated in ( 1 ) above the Commonwealth Government had no controls over the safety and efficacy of this imported substance at the critical time and consequently could not be held responsible. This is a matter which could only be determined after all the facts associated with the prescribing of the drug were known.

  1. In 1976 a sub-committee of the Australian Drug Evaluation Committee sought the assistance of the Royal Australian College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal Australian College of Pathologists in gathering reports of vaginal adenocarcinoma associated with diethylstilboestrol. To date, only three reports have been received together with one of vaginal adenosis. The Committee recognises that all cases may not have been reported.
  2. Yes to a limited extent between 1957 and 1959. However it is understood that legislation was introduced in all States in the early 1960’s prohibiting the use of Stilboestrol for this purpose.

Aboriginal Affairs: Grants to New South Wales (Question No. 4754)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 26 September 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Has the Minister received a report from the NSW State Branch of the National Aboriginal Conference on its visit to inspect Dodge City, an Aboriginal settlement at West Brewarrina, NSW where they described conditions as vile and hellish.
  2. Does the Minister recognise Federal Government undertakings in 1975 to relieve the NSW Government of financial responsibility for essential public funding of services for Aborigines.
  3. ) What funds has the Government allocated to meet the urgent needs of the community through (a) untied grants to the NSW Government, (b) special purpose grants to the State or the Aboriginal Lands Trust of NSW for the needs of Dodge City and (c) grants to a local government or Aboriginal organisations for similar purposes.
  4. What steps has the Minister taken to ensure that these urgent needs are promptly met.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. Yes.
  2. I do not consider that the 1975 Arrangement between the Commonwealth and New South Wales Governments with respect to Aboriginal affairs relieves the New South Wales Government ‘of financial responsibility for essential public funding of services for Aboriginals’. The Commonwealth’s general approach is to secure for Aboriginals access to Government services equal to that accorded other Australian citizens, together with additional services appropriate to their state of extreme disadvantage. Aboriginals, as residents of the State, are entitled to receive general community services provided by the State out of its own resources (including Commonwealth subventions) and to benefit from such community services on the principle of need. My Department supplements State resources, on a selective basis, to make general community services accessible to Aboriginals, to improve or accelerate the provision of such services, and to enable a State to provide selective services to Aboriginals to meet their special needs.
  3. and (4) As announced in my press statement of 16 October, a grant is being made to the Aboriginal Lands Trust of New South Wales which owns and manages the West Brewarrina housing area ($ 1 9,598 ). This grant includes provision for an initial clean up of the area and for the employment of an additional Aboriginal in the Brewarrina Shire work gang, which will provide a continuing service at West Brewarrina. The Department has provided grants totalling $121,771 to the Aboriginal Lands Trust over the past three years to meet repairs and maintenance and other recurrent costs.

A meeting was held in Brewarrina on 5 November, chaired by the President of the Brewarrina Shire Council and attended by representatives of the Aboriginal community, the Aboriginal Lands Trust, the New South Wales Department of Youth and Community Services and senior officers of my Department. There was general agreement that it was desirable to concentrate expenditure on the construction of new houses of satisfactory standard in and around Brewarrina, rather than on any costly renovation of the existing dwellings at West Brewarrina. My Department is providing $145,000 this financial year and $50,000 in the first pan of 1980-81 to the Ngemba Housing Co-operative for the construction of four houses. Subject to tenant participation, the Co-operative will also have additional funds for the purchase and construction of houses available from the sale of houses to tenants. The Department has provided $561,147 to the Ngemba Housing Co-operative since 1975-76. In addition, substantial grants have been provided to the New South Wales Housing Commission for Aboriginal housing in Brewarrina and the Commission had, at 30 June 1979, completed 18 houses Tor Aboriginals in the town with these grants (and another 14 of the Commission’s houses in Brewarrina are occupied by Aboriginals). This year the Housing Commission is completing two more houses and starting construction on another eight with grants from my Department ($193,000).

Pensions for Italian Citizens (Question No. 4757)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 26 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is it a fact that Australian citizens who have worked in Italy for a total of 15 years and for whom employers have made contributions to pension funds on their behalf are entitled to receive Italian pensions, even if they are resident in Australia.
  2. If so, what are the equivalent entitlements for Italian citizens normally resident in Italy to receive Australian pensions.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) In very broad terms, an Italian age pension is payable to a person in respect of whom appropriate contributions have been made for a period of not less than IS years and who, in the case of a man, has reached 60 years of age or, in the case of a woman, has reached 55 years of age. The age qualification may vary for persons in certain occupations and is generally waived for a person in respect of whom 35 years of contributions have been made. As there is no nationality or residence test, an Australian citizen resident in Australia who meets these criteria would be eligible to receive such a pension.
  2. ) A person is qualified to receive an Australian age pension if that person has, at any time, resided in Australia for a continuous period of not less than 10 yean, is residing in, and is physically present in, Australia on the date on which the claim for an age pension is made and, in the case of a man, has reached 65 years of age or, in the case of a woman, has reached 60 years of age. The 10 years’ continuous residence requirement is reduced if a claimant has resided in Australia for periods aggregating more than 10 years, at least one of which is or not less than 5 years’ duration. Once an Australian age pension has been granted it continues to be payable irrespective of the pensioner’s country of residence.

In addition, an Australian age pension may be granted to a claimant who is living outside Australia if: he lived for 30 years in Australia; he has not resided in Australia at any time since 7 May 1973; in the case of a man, he was 60 years of age before he left Australia (the relevant age for a woman is 55 years); and he is in special need of financial assistance.

An Italian citizen resident in Italy who meets the above criteria would be eligible to receive an Australian age pension.

Australian pensions are financed out of general revenue and are not dependent on specific contributions by a person to a nominated fund.

Exports to Japan (Question No. 4768)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 27 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has his attention been drawn to the Official Report of the Australian Parliamentary Delegation to Japan in July 1978, and to its recommendations, and in particular to the answer given by the Minister for Foreign Affairs to question No. 4496 (Hansard, 25 September 1 979, pages 1 530- 1 ) with respect to recommendation No. 5 of the report
  2. If so, what action has been taken with respect to recommendation No. 5.
  3. What Australian primary products have been exported since July 1978.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. Japan is a major market for a range of Australian agricultural commodities including wool, sugar, meat, wheat, canned and dried fruits, honey and dairy products.

With certain of these commodities access to the Japanese market is subject to quantitative export restrictions. The Government has negotiated to secure more liberal access to the Japanese market for these commodities and in the context of the Multilateral Trade Negotiations, obtained improved access for beef and tariff bindings on a number of other rural based products.

In addition the Government undertakes a vigorous trade promotional campaign in Japan for primary products. Funds provided for these activities include allocations by the Overseas Trade Publicity Committee, direct contributions by the various producer Boards and Corporations, and funds provided for this purpose to the Trade Commissioners in Tokyo and Osaka. The total for 1978-79 was $1,122,723 which represented a 1 7.8 per cent increase over the previous year.

The level and nature of promotional activity for Australian primary products in Japan is kept under continuous review. At the same time every opportunity to expand sales of these products in the Japanese market is vigorously pursued.

  1. The Department of Trade and Resources has supplied the following statistics showing exports of primary products to Japan in 1978-79.

Supplementary Assistance to Invalid Pensioners (Question No. 4793)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 9 October 1979:

  1. Is it a fact that spastics, quadriplegics and other chronic invalids cared for at home by relatives or friends receive the same invalid pension as psychologically or less physically invalid pensioners who care for themselves or who are cared for in public or government institutions.
  2. Is it also a fact that a means test of $1 a week for supplementary assistance for a chronic invalid pensioner is inadequate.
  3. How long has the means test for supplementary assistance on the invalid pension been at $ 1 per week.
  4. Will the Minister consider raising the supplementary assistance means test for invalid pensioners for chronic invalids.
  5. Will the Minister consider introducing another grade of invalid pension to include chronic invalids, such as spastics and quadriplegics, cared for by relatives or friends at home.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. Invalid pensions are payable to persons aged 16 or more who are not receiving an age pension and who are permanently incapacitated for work to the extent of not less than 85 per cent or who are permanently blind. The maximum basic rate of invalid pension is the same for all qualified persons regardless of the nature of incapacity and whether care is provided at home or in an institution. Additional payments are made for dependent children and supplementary (rent) assistance may be paid to those paying rent or for board and lodging.
  2. The maximum rate of supplementary assistance is $5 a week. This is reduced by the amount of any income in excess of $ I a week. No assistance is paid when income reaches $6 a week or $ 12 for a married couple. Where there are children these limits are increased by $6 for each child.
  3. The $1 ‘free area’ has existed since 1965.
  4. The income test on supplementary assistance for invalid pensioners is the same as that applicable to supplementary assistance for other pensioners, and is reviewed annually in the Budget context.
  5. The suggestion that new forms of assistance be provided for certain invalids has been noted.

In addition to the invalid pension there are other forms of financial assistance available which are designed to meet the special needs of invalid pensioners being cared for in a private home. These include the discretionary special benefit which may be paid to a person who gives, and who is the only person available to give, constant care and attention to an invalid near relative, and the domiciliary nursing care benefit of $14 per week is available independently of other income or benefits to a person caring full-time at home for a chronically ill or disabled person over the age of 16 who is visited by a registered nurse at specified intervals.

The Commonwealth also makes other forms of assistance available, such as through its health programs and the taxation system.

Australian Capital Territory Totalisator Agency Board (Question No. 4828)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) When did the Australian Capital Territory Totalisation Agency Board apply for a licence to start a radio station in Canberra.
  2. 2 ) When will he reply to the application.
  3. ) What is the reason for delay.
  4. Are any frequencies available.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) No applications have as yet been invited for further licences to serve Canberra. However, the Australian Capital Territory Totalisator Agency Board discussed its proposal for a Canberra Public Broadcasting station with officers of my Department in July 1 978.

The ACT TAB was informed at that time that resources were not available to begin work on a draft planning proposal for some considerable time. The TAB was informed, however, that it could submit a draft planning proposal of its own origination, and to this end information necessary for the preparation of a planning proposal has been forwarded to the TAB. I have instructed my Department to nominate an officer to advise the TAB in the drafting of a planning proposal should this approach be adopted.

  1. 2 ) and ( 3 ) See answer to (1 ) above.
  2. Yes.

Australian Fishing Zone (Question No. 4839)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Did the former Minister say in his ministerial statement of 25 September 1979 ( Hansard, pages 1461-4), that throughout the period of preparation for the Australian Fishing Zone the Commonwealth has maintained continuous consultations with the States and has kept them informed of the progress throughout the negotiations.
  2. If so, has the Queensland Government specifically been kept informed of negotiations between the Commonwealth and Japanese Governments.
  3. 3 ) Has the Queensland Government, prior to the week of 8 October 1979, expressed any reservations about or opposition to the terms of Japan ‘s access to the zone.
  4. How many tonnes of black marlin did the Japanese fish in or around Queensland waters in (a) 1970-71 and (b) 1976-77.
  5. What effects will heavy long line fishing by the Japanese have on the black marlin population in North Queensland waters.
  6. What associations and authorities have contacted his office to register opposition to the agreement.
  7. What is the (a) specific composition of the overseas interests, referred to by the firmer Minister in his ministerial statement of 25 September 1979, which have expressed interest in carrying out feasibility fishing projects and (b) specific nature of each of the proposed projects.
  8. What are commercial joint ventures referred to by the former Minister in his ministerial statement.
  9. When will these commercial joint ventures be established.
  10. will the category of foreign fishing boats increase or decrease in the coming years.
  11. 1 1 ) In what ways is it anticipated the Australian fishing industry will increase its share of the total allowable catch, as stated by the former Minister.
  12. Have any provisions been established in the foreign fishing agreements so far concluded for the processing in Australia of a portion of the foreign catch.
  13. Does the Japanese agreement specify the number of boats to be licensed.
  14. Have the negotiations with foreign fishing interests included any discussion on penalties for offences against Australian fishing laws.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes. Consultations with the States were effected through the Australian Fisheries Council committee structure that is through the Standing Committee on Fisheries, the South Eastern Fisheries Committee, the Northern Fisheries Committee and directly as the occasion necessitated by official discussions with the States concerned. Queensland is of course a member of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and the Northern Fisheries Committee and has been present at meetings of the South Eastern Fisheries Committee which discussed the Japanese negotiations. There have also been discussions with Queensland fisheries officials by their counterparts in the Commonwealth both prior to and following initialling of the Agreements.

Information relating to the progress of all negotiations including those with the Japanese was conveyed similarly through these committees and also in writing by the Minister to his Ministerial counterparts on the Australian Fisheries Council.

  1. Representations from the Queensland Government on behalf of game fishing interests were received in March 1 979 concerning the proposed areas of exclusion of Japanese tuna longliners from game-fishing grounds off Cairns.
  2. Published Japanese longline catch statistics record catches in numbers of fish rather than weight so it is necessary to estimate the weight of marlin caught.

The following table shows estimated catch, effort and catch rates for the years requested:

  1. Fishing in any fishery can be expected to reduce the overall stock size and density and hence the catch rate. It would also reduce the average size of fish. Catch rates of black marlin in north Queensland waters have shown considerable variability but no overall trend during the 1 970 ‘s.
  2. The following authorities and associations have made representations:

page 3433

LIST OF ASSOCIATIONS AND AUTHORITIES

Keppel Bay Sportfishing Club.

Gold Coast Sportfishing Club.

Brisbane Sportfishing Club.

Mackay Visitors Bureau.

Caravan Parks Association of Queensland, Whitsunday

Wonderworld Division.

West Districts Sportsfishing Club.

Sandgate Young Liberals.

Charters Towers City Council.

Lizard Island Research Station.

Cairns Professional Game Fishing Club.

Moreton Bay Game Fishing Club.

Billfish Advisory Sub-Panel, Western Pacific Regional

Fishery Management Council.

Hawaiian International Billfish Association.

Pacific Gamefish Foundation.

Broken Bay Gamefishing Club.

The Gamefishing Assoc. of Victoria.

Mitchelton Veterinary Centre.

Toowoomba and District Medical Assoc.

Furthermore, the Fisheries Act 1952 has been amended to provide for penalties of up to $250,000 for illegal foreign fishing in the AFZ. In addition to the substantial increases in penalties, a magistrate may order forfeiture of a vessel, including its catch and equipment, upon a conviction being recorded. Under the terms of the agreement with Kailis Kaohsiung Fishing Company as agent for the Kaohsiung Fishing Boat Commercial Guild, only vessels nominated by the Guild will be licensed. The Guild has been given sole authority to represent all the trawl and gillnet fishing boats of Taiwan which apply for licences to fish within the AFZ. Under the terms and conditions of access, the Kailis Kaohsiung Fishing Company or the Guild as appropriate, will bear the full responsibility for all Taiwanese vessels, licensed or unlicensed. Assurances from the Company and the Guild have been received that the Taiwanese authorities will exercise strict control over all Taiwanese fishing activities in the AFZ. The company has been advised that continuation of access for Taiwanese fishing vessels to the AFZ is dependent on effective control being exercised and on the cessation of all illegal activities particularly those by clam vessels in the Great Barrier Reef. In addition to the substantial increases in penalties, a magistrate may order forfeiture of a vessel, including its catch and equipments, upon a conviction being recorded.

Australian Fishing Zone (Question No. 4840)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) What technical assistance is given by the Japanese to the Australian fishing industry.
  2. What assurances on access to the Japanese market for Australian fish and fish products have been given by the Japanese as referred to in the former Minister’s ministerial statement to the House on 25 September 1979 (Hansard, pages 1461-4).
  3. Because of public disquiet and opposition by the Queensland Government and because of Commonwealth Government claims that the negotiations are too far advanced to be broken at this stage, will he undertake now not to re-issue the licenses or to re-admit the Japanese to the Australian Fishing Zone in 1980 when the terms of access are again reviewed.
  4. Did the former Minister in his ministerial statement say that the results of the talks with Taiwanese fishing interests and their Australian agents are now under consideration by the Commonwealth and the relevant States with a view to finalising arrangements to enable licences to be issued prior to the commencement of the Zone; if so, which States have taken part in discussions with the Commonwealth.
  5. What aspects of Taiwanese fishing were discussed by the Commonwealth with the Taiwanese.
  6. In the event that illegal activities by certain Taiwanese clam boats on the Barrier Reef does not cease will the agreement with the Taiwanese be voided.
  7. What are the opinions of the relevant State Governments concerning Taiwanese fishing within the Zone.
  8. Has a payment of access fee from Taiwanese fishing interests been discussed; if so, has a precise fee been determined.
  9. How did the Government arrive at the $1.4m access fee with the Japanese Government.
  10. 10) Have State Governments been kept informed of the negotiations with the Korean Government and will he consider allowing State Governments to take pan in these negotiations if they are not already doing so.
  11. 1 1 ) As the former Minister said in his ministerial statement that no timetable has yet been set for negotiations with other countries, will he say with which other countries the Government expects to conduct negotiations on access to the Zone.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) In the context of the Australia /Japan Fisheries Agreement, Japan has agreed to continue the provision of technical assistance to the Australian fishing industry through the following technical assistance projects:

    1. accepting an Australian national in an appropriate Japanese research institution for training in the culturing of prawns;
    2. accepting an Australian national in an appropriate Japanese research institution for training in the light weight purse seining for jack mackerel;
    3. accepting an Australian national in an appropriate Japanese research institution for training in the catching of octopuses (Paroctopus dofleini dofleini (Wulker));
    4. conducting studies, and making available to Australian fisheries authorities the results of those studies on commercial harvesting of octopuses in Australian fisheries;
    5. sending a research vessel to survey Australian squid resources and possible catching techniques; and
    6. examining means of improving culture techniques of Tasmanian rainbow trout in sea water.

  2. The market access issue was one element of the negotiations on the recently signed fishery agreement between Australia and Japan.

As a result of these negotiations certain understandings have been reached between the Australian and Japanese Governments.

Japan will advise Australia of the details of its import quota restrictions and give the Australian Government forewarning of any alterations in access conditions on fisheries products of interest to Australia, so that, if necessary consultations or negotiations can be held with Japan.

In the negotiations the Japanese Government advised that where Australia’s fish and fish products are commercially competitive with the fish and fish products of other nations, market access is and will be available for such Australian fish and fish products under the Japanese import system.

If the situation should arise where Japanese import restrictions were to inhibit reasonable access for Australian fish and fish products, the Australian Government’s expectation is that prompt consultations would be held when requested by Australia, that such consultations would be approached in a constructive and positive spirit and with the aim of reaching a mutually satisfactory solution. At all times such consultations would take into account the wider co-operative relations between Australia and Japan in the fisheries field.

  1. The Subsidiary Agreement concerning Japanese tuna longline fishing was signed on 17 October 1979 and has a currency of twelve months from 1 November 1979 with provision for re-negotiation not later than three months before its expiry. The terms and conditions of access for Japanese longline vessels will be reviewed prior to renegotiation in consultation with the States and industry. In this respect the Commonwealth and Queensland have agreed that a study is to be undertaken by a government/industry working group to assess the effect of Japanese tuna longlining on the marlin fishery off north Queensland. Membership of the working group comprises government representatives from

Queensland, New South Wales and the Commonwealth and game fishermen’s organisations from Queensland and New South Wales. The Japanese Government has been notified that during the operation of the Subsidiary Agreement the Australian Government will be paying particular attention to the monitoring of the arrangements as they affect game fishing stocks and activities off northern Queensland.

  1. Yes. The Governments of Queensland, Western Australia and Northern Territory have been fully consulted during talks with Taiwanese commercial fishing interests and have approved the agreements for access by Taiwanese fishing vessels, with the Kailis Kaohsiung Fishing Company, as agent for the Kaohsiung Fishing Boat Commercial Guild.
  2. All the terms and conditions concerning access to waters off north and north west of Australia and the controls to apply to all fishing activities and in particular the requirement for a cessation of illegal clam vessel operations on the Great Barrier Reef, were discussed with representatives of the Kailis Kaohsiung Fishing Company (KKFC), representing the Taiwanese fishermen.
  3. The agreement with the KKFC provides for the surrender of Australian licences, in respect of a number of Taiwanese fishing vessels that the Commonwealth Government shall solely determine, in the event of significant levels of contravention of Australian laws by Taiwanese fishing vessels, whether licensed or unlicensed. The company and the Guild have also been advised that continuation of access for Taiwanese fishing vessels to the AFZ is dependent on effective controls over all Taiwanese fishing activities being exercised, particularly cessation of all illegal activities by clam vessels on the Great Barrier Reef. Furthermore, the Fisheries Act 1952 has been amended to provide for penalties of up to $250,000 for illegal foreign fishing in the AFZ. In addition to the substantial increase in penalties, a magistrate may order forfeiture of a vessel, including its catch and equipment, upon a conviction being recorded.
  4. The Governments of Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory have approved the agreements.
  5. Yes. The payment of access fees, based on the value of fish to be taken from the zone, has been agreed. The access fees for the 12 month period of the agreements are $825,000 for trawling and $ 1 59,600 for gillnetting.
  6. The access fee of $ 1.4m paid by Japan is a negotiated figure and is based on the value of the fish taken from the zone. The fee compares favourably with fees charged by other countries including countries of our region.
  7. 10) Yes. State Governments and the Northern Territory has been kept informed of negotiations with the Republic of Korea. At the recent meeting of the Australian Fisheries Council on 2 November 1979, I agreed to refer to the Government the matter of State representation on government delegations negotiating bilateral fisheries arrangements.
  8. The Government has given priority to concluding negotiations with those countries having an existing fishing presence in Australian waters prior to proclamation of the Australian fishing zone on 1 November 1979. In this regard, agreements have been finalised with Japan and with Taiwanese commercial interests. Negotiations with the Republic of Korea are scheduled to recommence early next year. No timetable has been set for negotiations with other countries. The availability of fisheries resources surplus to Australia’s harvesting capacity is a determining factor and the assessment of surplus resources is under continuing examination by the Commonwealth and the Suites, particularly in the light of the results of feasibility fishing activities.

Overseas Air Tickets (Question No. 4841)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Since the introduction of Qantas advance purchase overseas air fares, how many tickets bought at off-peak period rates have been cancelled for each of the routes for which advanced purchase tickets may be purchased.
  2. How many cancelled seats have since been sold to other travellers on each of the routes.
  3. Will he recommend to Qantas that a waiting list be introduced for those persons who wish to purchase a cancelled ticket at off-peak rates.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. ) and (2) It is not possible to advise how many advance purchase tickets bought at off-peak period rates have been cancelled and subsequently resold because such information is not retained by Qantas.

There is no guarantee that the airlines would be able to sell cancelled APEX seats to ‘on-demand’ passengers within the advance purchase period. During thisperiod, the airlines are not permitted to sell cancelled APEX seats to APEX passengers since this would clearly contravene ticket conditions.

If the practice of allowing some APEX passengers to make their payment within the advance purchase period were to be permitted, those passengers who had purchased their travel in accordance with the advance purchase conditions could understandably claim that they were being discriminated against.

APEX passengers are, of course, allowed to cancel their travel outside the advance purchase period on payment of a cancellation fee. This fee is designed to compensate the airlines for the costs involved in processing the reservation and ticketing the passenger. Naturally, APEX seats cancelled outside the advance purchase period are made available for resale as APEX seats.

Qantas ‘s recent experience on the Australia/UK route suggests that, within the advance purchase period, there are approximately six cancelled APEX bookings on each service, of which about three are passengers who simply do not turn up for the flight. Clearly, considering the average seat utilisation achieved by Qantas since the introduction of lower fares, the number of unsold seats significantly exceeds the number of seats for which APEX passengers have forfeited their fares. (3)I understand that Qantas has examined the feasibility of operating a wait-list for persons wishing to purchase a cancelled APEX ticket at off-peak rates.

I am informed this examination has shown that such a facility presents difficulties. The introduction of a wait-list would add significantly to Qantas ‘s administrative workload, the costs of which would need to be recovered either through fare increases or the levying of some other charge.

Further problems involve the impact on passengers’ expectations. With the availability of a wait-list facility outside the advance purchase period, some intending APEX passengers may be tempted to defer completion of their travel arrangements in anticipation of ultimately obtaining an APEX seat through the wait-list, particularly if their preferred travel date is fully booked and instead of choosing alternative travel dates they could elect to wait-list for their preferred date of travel.

Should no seat become available outside the advance purchase period for the preferred date of travel, not only will the intending passenger not travel on that date, but in all likelihood the passenger would have missed the opportunity to arrange APEX travel at an acceptable alternative date.

In the circumstances it would appear that the limited benefits which would be derived from a wait-list facility may be far outweighed by the disadvantages and additional cost of providing such a facility.

Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (Question No. 4847)

Mr Innes:
MELBOURNE, VICTORIA

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. Has the public undertaking made in April 1979 by the Chairperson of the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal to repay a liquor account been honoured.
  2. 2 ) Has Mr Gyngell, in relation to his position, entertained guests at home since April 1 979, if so, how often.
  3. Has any claim on the entertainment budget for the Tribunal eventuated as a result of the entertainment referred to in part (2).
  4. What was the entertainment budget and actual expenditure for the Tribunal in (a) 1976-77, (b) 1977-78 and (c)

1978- 79.

  1. What is the entertainment budget for the Tribunal in 1979- 80 and what has been the expenditure to 9 October 1979.
  2. What are the itemised claims upon these budgets made by Mr Gyngell in relation to home entertainment.
  3. Was any documentation provided by Mr Gyngell to support his statement that the true liquor bill referred to in part (1) was for $319.45, not $519.45; if so, what was this documentation and will he make part or all of it public.
  4. If no documentation was produced, was Mr Gyngell ‘s assertion of a $200 discrepancy accepted; if so, why.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. No.
  3. 3 ) No. See my answer to question ( 2 ).

  4. The entertainment budget and actual expenditure for the Tribunal in-

    1. 1976-77, (b) 1977-78 and (c) 1978-79 were as follows:
  1. The Tribunal does not have an entertainment budget for 1979-80.
  2. Not applicable.
  3. Documentation was provided by Mr Gyngell in the form of invoices for an amount of $3 19.45.
  4. Documentation produced- see my answer to question (7).

Delivery of Personal Effects to Butterworth (Question No. 4859)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 1 1 October 1979:

Is it a fact that there is a 6 months delay on the delivery of personal effects to personnel at the RAAF Base at Butterworth; if so, what measures are in hand to rectify this.

Mr Killen:
Minister for Defence · MORETON, QUEENSLAND · LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

No; not applicable.

Australia-USSR Society Festival (Question No. 4893)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 16 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is the Australia-USSR Society at present conducting a propaganda festival in Sydney.
  2. If so, is part of this festival also part of the International Year of the Child program.
  3. Is the Government malting a financial contribution to this festival; if so, what amount.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. and (2) My Department’s IYC Unit was advised of the program proposed for the Festival, including the IYC segment and listed the event, along with many hundreds of events and projects in the July 1979 ‘Catalogue of National Events and Projects in Australia’. While the IYC Unit has undertaken the gathering of the information contained in the catalogue, it in no way reflects the attitude of the Department of Social Security to these projects, nor does the Department carry any responsibility for the nature or viability of projects listed.
  2. My Department has not contributed financially to the Festival.

Immigration: Change of Status (Question Na 4905)

Dr Blewett:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 16 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) Further to his answer to question No. 4432 (Hansard, 26 September 1979, page 1600) relating to change of status, is it a fact that 37.9 per cent of all applications approved for change of status during 1978-79 fell into the ‘others’ category (i.e. outside those categories which according to his statement of 7 June 1978 were to be the only exceptions).
  2. What are the chief characteristics of this ‘others’ category.
Mr MacKellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. and (2) A large proportion of the ‘Others ‘ category included approvals of applications lodged prior to 7 June 1978 which were considered under the previous policy for change of status. Also included are approvals on compassionate or other humanitarian grounds, approvals following representations including from Members of the Parliament drawing attention to special features warranting approval, and other Special cases in small numbers covering fiance(e)s previously admitted as temporary entrants, working holiday makers and students other than private students.

There is some overlapping among these groups and a precise breakdown of the reasons for approvals could only be prepared on the basis of a study of each case file. I do not think this is warranted.

Petroleum Marketing Industry (Question No. 4932)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 1 7 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Did he state in a media release of 1 7 August 1 979 that he would be reporting to the Government in the near future on the outcome of his examination of the petroleum marketing industry.
  2. ) When will the Parliament be informed of his findings.
  3. Has the Government’s apparent determination of 1978 to stop oil companies retailing petrol directly to the public and also to prevent selective discounting, weakened in the 1 1 months since his statement in October 1978.
Mr Fife:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. The Government announced a decision on the proposals for the petroleum retail marketing industry on 23 October 1979. It has decided to prepare draft franchising legislation for the industry and a draft Bill will be exposed for public examination and comment as soon as possible. The intention of any legislation would be to ensure equitable treatment for lessee and licensee petroleum dealers. The draft Bill will provide for payment of compensation to franchisees for unjust termination of a franchise or unreasonable refusal to renew a franchise. It will also provide for full disclosure of relevant information to incoming franchisees, rights for franchisees to continuation of supplies, without discrimination in the event of any shortage, and rights of assignment of their franchises. The Government has deferred a final decision on the possible proposals relating to price discrimination and a prohibition of oil companies engaging in retail petroleum marketing. A decision will be taken on these proposals after the Government has had the opportunity to consider comments on the draft franchising Bill and also a report from the Trade Practices Commission which has been requested to monitor and report on the extent of price discrimination in the industry.
  3. See (2) above.

Hire of F27 Aircraft (Question No. 4941)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 17 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) What was the purpose of the hire of F27 aircraft referred to in contract C2/79/45 on page 78 of the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette of 18 September 1979.
  2. How many F27 aircraft were hired and for what length of time.
  3. ) Where were the aircraft operated.
  4. By what means are the tasks performed by the aircraft mentioned in this contract normally performed.
  5. Were there any tenderers for this contract other than East-West Airlines Ltd; if so, what were the names, addresses and tender prices of the unsuccessful tenderers.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The F27 aircraft was hired in accordance with the Department’s flight standards surveillance program, which requires Examiners of Airmen to maintain proficiency on the various types of regular public transport aircraft.
  2. ) One aircraft for six hours.
  3. Tamworth,NSW.
  4. This is the normal means of meeting this requirement.
  5. Yes. Trans Australia Airlines, Melbourne. In accordance with Finance Regulation S3, details of successful tenders only are disclosed.

Civil Aviation: Parallel Scheduling (Question No. 4948)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 7 October 1 979:

  1. 1 ) By what means and on what dates has he formally asked TAA and Ansett to end parallel scheduling on any routes since 1975.
  2. ) Which routes are involved.
  3. What has been the detailed formal response from TAA and Ansett Transport Industries Ltd.
  4. Why has the incidence of parallel scheduling increased since 1975 as reported by the Bureau of Transport Economics.
  5. What was the incidence of parallel scheduling of major domestic airline services in Australia expressed as a proportion of total scheduled timetable departures in (a) 1974-75, (b) 1975-76, (c) 1976-77, (d) 1977-78 and (e) 1978-79.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (1)I wrote to the chairman of both Ansett and TAA on the 14 August 1978 requesting that consultations take place with a view to jointly bringing forward firm proposals involving the reduced incidence of parallel scheduling between the two airlines. This was followed up by correspondence on 26 March 1979 and 25 June 1979.

  1. All competitive routes.
  2. The airlines have advised that a joint working group has been established to devise separated timetables which provide each airline the potential for achieving a 50 per cent share of the market.
  3. The Bureau of Transport Economics has not reported on the incidence of parallel scheduling.
  4. 5 ) The information sought is not readily available.

Pilot Actuated Airport Lighting Control Units (Question No. 4950)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 7 October 1 979:

  1. ) What are the items being purchased under contract Cl/78/29 referred to on page 77 of the Commonwealth of A ustralia Gazette ( g 3 7 ) of 1 8 September 1979.
  2. At what airports are the items being purchased to be located and for what purpose are they to be used.
  3. What is the expected service life of the items being purchased.
  4. Who were the unsuccessful tenderers for the contract.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Pilot actuated airport lighting control units are remote switching units developed by the Department of Transport to provide a more cost effective means of activating airport lighting at unattended aerodromes. Installation of these units enables approaching pilots to switch on lighting systems at destinations without the need for ground assistance.
  2. Queensland: Barcaldine, Boulia, Bundaberg, Charleville, Charters Towers, Clermont, Coolangatta, Cloncurry, Cunnamulla, Dalby, Gladstone, Goondiwindi, Hughenden, Julia Creek, Longreach, Mackay, Mt Isa, Quilpie, Richmond, Rockhampton, Roma, St George, Thangool, Thargomindah, Toowoomba, Winton.

New South Wales: Balranald, Bourke, Brewarrina, Camden, Casino, Gunnedah, Merimbula, Mudgee, Narromine, Walgett, West Wyalong, Young.

Tasmania: Devonport, King Island, Wynyard.

Victoria: Ararat, Bairnsdale, Benalla, Bendigo, Hopetoun, Hamilton, Horsham, Kerang, Latrobe Valley, Nhill, Sale, Shepparton, Warrnambool.

South Australia: Leigh Creek, Oodnadatta.

Northern Territory: Tennant Creek, Tindal.

  1. Fifteen years.
  2. Universal Electronics, Brookvale, NSW, T.B.C. Pty Ltd, Hornsby, NSW.

Black Marlin Fishery (Question No. 4987)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 24 October 1979:

  1. 1) Is it a fact that the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority is presently conducting a catch-effort study on the black marlin fisheries off the Australian coast.
  2. Is the Authority included in the working committee established by him to monitor and collate information on the black marlin in the 12 months period of the Australia/Japan Fishing Agreement; if not, why not.
  3. Does the black marlin fishery come within the region of the Great Barrier Reef.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority has programs investigating the catch, effort and economic structure of recreational fishing in the Great Barrier Reef region. The work on the marlin fishery is a small part of an overall study of recreational fishing. The program is based in part on analysis of catch and effort data provided by fishermen, charter boat operators and fishing clubs.
  2. No. Responsibility for the management of marlin fishing in Australian waters rests with Commonwealth and State fisheries authorities. The working group is comprised of the First Assistant Secretary, Fisheries Division, Department of Primary Industry and three members nominated by the Queensland Minister for Maritime Services and Tourism and three members nominated by the New South Wales Minister for Conservation and Water Resources. Both State Ministers have nominated their chief fisheries officers and two representatives of game fishermen to the committee. The working group will consult with relevant organisations, including the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, as appropriate.
  3. Most black marlin fishing activity takes place outside the Great Barrier Reef region. Sport fishing for black marlin, but no foreign longlining activity, takes place inside the outer edge of the Great Barrier Reef.

Conference on Family Policy (Question No. 5015)

Mr McLean:
PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 6 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has it yet been decided who will attend the public conference in Sydney during 1980 to discuss the theme, Towards An Australian Family Policy.
  2. Who will administer and finance this conference.
  3. How many delegates will attend the conference from each of the States and Territories of Australia.
  4. How many of the these delegates will be full-time mothers from single-income, two-parent families.
  5. How many of these delegates will be fathers from single-income, two-parent families.
  6. How many of these delegates will be mothers or fathers from single-parent families.
  7. What are the qualifications of other delegates (excluding those in parts (4), (S) and (6)) attending the public conference.
  8. Who will pay the fares of those delegates attending the conference referred to in parts (4), (S) and (6).
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. No.
  2. The Conference is being sponsored by the Council of Social Welfare Ministers. A Steering Committee has been established to organise the Conference and consists of representatives from both Commonwealth and State Governments, as well as members of the non-Government sector as participant-observers.

It is intended that the conference be self-financing although arrangements are being made to cover the cost of 20 free places.

  1. The Council of Social Welfare Ministers has decided to limit the numbers of delegates who are to be invited to attend the conference and the Commonwealth/ State/Territory quota is as follows:

    1. a ) Commonwealth- 20 places
    2. State/Territory- 140 places

Overall, it is envisaged that there will be equal representation between the government and non-government sectors. (4), (S), (6), (7) and (8) No decision has been made at this stage on matters raised in these items.

East-West Airlines (Question No. 5037)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many applications for fare increases have been made by East-West Airlines since December 1975.
  2. ) On what date was each application made.
  3. On what date did the Government grant approval or otherwise to each of the applications.
  4. What was the extent of the fare rise approved by him on each occasion.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Nine.
  2. , (3) and (4)-

East-West Airlines (Question No. 5038)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has East- West Airlines lodged an application to introduce medium-sized jet aircraft on its routes; if so, when was the application lodged and for which aircraft has approval been sought.
  2. Has the Government reached a decision on the application; if not, when will a decision be made.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2 ) See the answer to Question No. 5063.

Aboriginal Affairs: Negotiations with States (Question No. 5053)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Further to his answer to question No. 4915 (Hansard, 6 November 1979, page 2671), what meetings have taken place during the period 1 November 1978 to 6 November 1979, with representatives of the States, exploring the differences of interpretation of the existing arrangements in relation to Aboriginal affairs.
  2. 2 ) What was the date of each meeting and its location.
  3. What Ministers or officers were present to represent the ( a ) Commonwealth and ( b ) relevant States.
  4. What aspects of existing arrangements were the subject matter of discussion at each meeting.
  5. Were any issues the subject of agreement; if so, what are the details.
  6. What outstanding matters continue to be the subject matter of further negotiations, and with which States.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question: ( 1 ), (2) and (3) The following meetings have taken place with the representatives of States to explore differences in interpretation of the existing agreements in relation to Aboriginal affairs.

Australian Aboriginal Affairs Council, Adelaide, 18 May 1979

The Council is a conference of Commonwealth and State Ministers with responsibility for Aboriginal Affairs. At this meeting, the Council resolved: that discussions should be held between officers of particular States and the Commonwealth so that the desirability of reviewing arrangements can be considered. ‘

The following Ministers, supported by officers, attended:

Commonwealth: Minister for Aboriginal Affairs

New South Wales: Minister for Youth and Community Services

Victoria: Minister for Housing

Queensland: Minister for Aboriginal and Island Affairs

South Australia: Minister for Community Welfare

Western Australia: Minister for Health and Community Welfare

Tasmania: Minister for Environment and Water Resources

Northern Territory: Chief Minister and AttorneyGeneral.

Meeting with Victorian Officials, Melbourne, 1 7 September 1979

Officers representing the following authorities were present:

State: Ministry of Housing, Department of Education.

Commonwealth: Departments of Aboriginal Affairs and Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Meeting with Tasmanian Officials, Hobart, 28 September 1979

Officers representing the following authorities were present:

State: Office of the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, Education Department, Housing Department, Health Services Department, Social Welfare Department.

Commonwealth: Department of Aboriginal Affairs.

Meeting with South Australian Officials, Adelaide, 3 October 1979

Officers representing the following authorities were present:

State: Premier’s Department, Treasury Department, Aboriginal Co-ordinating Committee.

Commonwealth: Department of Aboriginal Affairs.

Meeting with Western Australian Officials, Penh, 4 October 1979

Officers representing the following authorities were present:

State: Depanment of Health and Medical Services, Education Depanment, Crown Law Department, State

Housing Commission, Treasury Department, Department of Community Welfare.

Commonwealth: Department of Aboriginal Affairs.

Meeting with New South Wales Officials, Sydney, 24 October 1979

Officers representing the following Departments were present:

State: Department of Youth and Community Services, Treasury Department, Premier’s Department.

Commonwealth: Departments of Aboriginal Affairs and Prime Minister and Cabinet.

  1. At the meetings of officials the respective financial responsibilities of the Commonwealth and the States in Aboriginal affairs were discussed, together with specific programs and policies in the individual States which are affected by the division of responsibilities.
  2. There was broad agreement with most States that the arrangements were satisfactory in general terms.
  3. Further negotiations need to be held with each State concerned to determine more precisely which services should be provided respectively by the Commonwealth and the States.

Australian Wheat Board (Question No. S0S6)

Mr Clyde Cameron:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 8 November 1979:

Is the Australian Wheat Board selling promissory notes to the value of $167 million through syndicates of money market dealers and merchant bankers; if so, what is the justification for this action.

Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Earlier this year, the Australian Wheat Board borrowed commercially, through the issue of bank accepted bills, to raise funds additional to those available from the Rural Credits Department of the Reserve Bank to make first advance payments to growers for the 1978/79 crop and to meet the marketing expenses of that wheat pool.

The full details and justification for these borrowings are set out in Senator Carrick ‘s answer to Senator Walsh ‘s Question on Notice No. 1 376 which appeared on page 2297 of the Senate Hansard of 29 May 1 979. Securities maturing in September from those commercial borrowings have been refinanced by the Board through the issue of promissory notes to the value of $167 million. The refinancing arrangements were decided after considering offers from trading banks, merchants bankers and authorised money market dealers.

Airline Seat Reservation Systems (Question No. 5060)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport upon notice, on 13 November 1979: ( 1 )What has been the expenditure on capital purchases of equipment associated with the operation of seat reservation systems by (a) Ansett Airlines (b) Trans Australia Airlines and (c) East West Airlines during (i) 1977-78 and (ii) 1978-79.

  1. 2 ) What was the expenditure on ( a ) other costs including all labour costs associated with operation of those airlines’ seat reservation systems and (b) all matters associated with installation and operation of the seat reservation systems during(i) 1977-78 and (ii) 1978-79
  2. 3 ) What proportion of ( a ) airline operating costs ( b ) total airline costs and (c) airline passenger revenue did each expenditure represent during (i) 1977-78 and (ii) 1978-79.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (I), (2) and (3)- The information requested is of a detailed commercial nature and as the airlines concerned are operating in a commercial environment it would not be appropriate to disclose such information

East-West Airlines: F28 and Bandierante Aircraft (Question No. 5063)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 13 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has East- West Airlines sought approval to import F28 jet aircraft and Bandierante turbo prop aircraft; if so, (a) how many of each type of aircraft has the company sought to import and what are the proposed dates for importation, (b) on what routes is each type of aircraft proposed to be used, (c) when were the applications for import approval lodged and (d) have any applications been approved
  2. If the applications have not been approved when does he expect to make a decision.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) Application has not been received from EastWest Airlines to import either F28 or Bandierante aircraft. The airline has, however, expressed interest in introducing aircraft of the F28 type for its current route network and requested approval in principle of the importation of such aircraft. Consultations are being held with the Company on the proposals.

Airline Passenger Load Factors (Question No. 5067)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 13 November 1979:

What was the passenger load factor achieved by (a) Trans Australia Airlines, ( b) East West Airlines and (c) Ansett Airlines for (i) first class seats and (ii) economy seats in each year from 1974-75 to 1978-79 and the period 1 July 1979 to date.

Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Passenger load factors for first and economy class are not collected separately by the Department of Transport, and East West Airlines operate only single class services. The following load factors therefore refer to total passengers carried under all revenue fare categories:

New Zealanders Receiving Unemployment Benefits (Question No. 5077)

Mr Neil:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 13 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Are New Zealanders in Australia entitled to unemployment benefits on the same basis as Australians; if not, on what basis do they receive them.
  2. How many persons who have arrived in Australia from New Zealand in the period 1 November 1978 to 3 November 1 979 are receiving unemployment benefits.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) In order to qualify for unemployment benefits under the provisions of the Social Services Act a person must, among other things, be residing in Australia on the date he lodges his claim for benefit and have been continuously so resident for a period of not less than twelve months preceding that date or satisfy the Director-General that he is likely to remain permanently in Australia.

Under the reciprocal agreement on social security between Australia and New Zealand, people from New Zealand are deemed to be permanently resident in Australia after they have been here for six months.

Thus, New Zealanders who are temporarily in Australia are not entitled to unemployment benefits if they have been here for less than six months.

If the New Zealanders satisfy the Director-General that they are likely to remain permanently in Australia or have been in Australia for six months, unemployment benefits may be paid subject to other conditions of eligibility.

  1. The number of people from New Zealand currently receiving unemployment benefits is not known.

Unemployment Benefits (Question No. 5093)

Mr Hodgman:
DENISON, TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is it a fact that at the Minister’s request, the Department of Social Security is conducting a continuing review of the levels of all social security benefits and in particular, unemployment benefits.
  2. What would the cost to revenue be if unemployment beneficiaries were permitted to earn (a) $20, (b) $30 and $40 per week without suffering any reduction in their unemployment benefit payments.
  3. Would the Minister consider the possibility of raising the amount of outside income which can be earned without any reduction in unemployment benefits to at least $20 per week.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) and (3) The Government has the rates of all pensions and benefits under continual review, particularly in the Budget context.
  2. There is no reliable information upon which to make an accurate estimate of the cost of increasing the permissible income limits for unemployment benefits- it is expected that the costs involved would be substantial.

Indexing of Family Allowances (Question No. 5100)

Mr Goodluck:
FRANKLIN, TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 15 November 1979:

Is it possible as a first step to the indexing of family allowances to implement a scheme to index family allowances for families who are in receipt of one income on or below the average weekly earning or two incomes which together do not exceed that figure (i.e. widow’s pension, single parents benefit, male or female invalid pensioners, etc.); if so, what would the cost to revenue be; if not, why not.

Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

It would be possible to implement a scheme whereby indexed family allowances would be payable to families where the families’ incomes were equivalent to or less than average weekly earnings, but administration would be complex and costly. Before such a scheme could be implemented a large number of decisions would be required on matters such as:

The definition of the family members to be included in the income unit for the purpose of income testing, e.g. would income of children be included?

Over what period would family income be assessed and average earnings determined? Would it be, for example, the previous financial year, the previous quarter or an estimate for the current year? Would provision be made to vary payments for families whose financial and other circumstances change?

Would the increases be paid on an all-or-nothing basis? If so, there would be inequities. If not, would the tapering take place before or after the income limit of average weekly earnings? What would be the rate of taper?

How frequently would the maximum rates of family allowances be adjusted and how soon after the relevant movement in the Consumer Price Index?

Would pensioner and beneficiary families be treated in the same way as other families or would special arrangements be made to avoid overlapping income tests?

Answers would need to be given to these kinds of questions before any work could be done to make a reasonable estimate of the cost and numbers involved. The cost would also, of course, be dependent on the rate of inflation and movements in average weekly earnings. Even if these matters were resolved, cost estimates would not be reliable since comprehensive and up to date information on the income distribution of Australian families, in a form suitable for costing purposes, is not available. It may be possible to more accurately cost such proposals once the detailed results of the Australian Bureau of Statistics 1978-79 Income Survey become available.

Motor Vehicle Industry: Export Facilitation Scheme (Question No. 5101)

Dr Blewett:

asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce, upon notice, on 15 November 1979:

  1. Has General Motors, in its discussions with him regarding the export facilitation scheme, supplied him with details of the sourcing of imported components; if so, what are the components and what are the sources from which these components will be imported?
  2. Will the export credit scheme operate on a value for component basis; if so, what arrangements will the Government introduce to balance the labour-cost component of imports from low-wage countries with the labour-cost component of Australian exports?
  3. If the export credit scheme will not operate on a value of components basis, what basis will be used?
Mr Lynch:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) General Motors-Holden has supplied me in confidence with information relating to decisions taken to date in relation to its J car engine program. This information relates to both imported and locally sourced components. Because of the commercially confidential nature of this information it would not be appropriate for me to disclose such details.

However the company announced on 15 November that of 55 engine components for which sourcing decisions have been taken 47 components will be purchased from Australian manufacturers. Decisions on sourcing of the remaining 150 components for the engine will be made in the first quarter of 1980. The company stated that it expects 80 per cent of these to be purchased from local suppliers in the first year of engine production rising to 90 per cent by the third year.

  1. and (3) As I announced on 22 February last in this House, the minimum elements of the Export Facilitation Scheme involve the provision within the Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Plan for export credits to be available to off-set Plan imports on a dollar for dollar basis up to a limit specified in percentage points of local content.

Further details of the Scheme in addition to the minimum elements will not be announced until the Government has completed its consideration of the Industries Assistance Commission report on the matter. The basis for valuing imports and exports under the scheme is one of the matters to be determined.

Australian Capital Territory Hen Quotas (Question No. 5139)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice, on 16 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Will additional hen quotas be made available in the Australian Capital Territory; if so, when.
  2. What method will be used to determine the allocations of additional quotas.
  3. Will public tenders be called for the additional quotas.
  4. What action does he propose to take in order to make sure that a monopoly situation is not created in the ACT. Will the Government take action to limit the hen quotas available to any single farmer or group of farmers.
Mr Ellicott:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

The ACT hen quota is the subject of current and active negotiations with the Council of Egg Marketing Authorities of Australia. The Council has indicated its co-operation in seeking to reach agreement on a revised quota for the Territory within the next few days.

I am currently giving careful consideration to the allocation of an expected increase in the current hen quota but I have not yet decided what mechanism and criteria will be employed.

I will ensure that the information sought by the honourable member is provided to him as soon as I am in a position to do so.

Social Security Grants (Question No. 5159)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 21 November 1979:

What sums were paid by the Commonwealth in grants in the Electoral Divisions of (I) the Northern Territory, (2) Canberra, (3) Kalgoorlie, (4) Perth, (5) Swan, (6) Sturt, (7) Kingston, (8) Ballarat, (9) Bendigo, (10) Deakin, (II) McMillan, (12) Isaacs, (13) Henty, (14) Holt, (15) La Trobe, ( 16) Hotham, ( 17) Bass, ( 18) Franklin, ( 19) Braddon, (20) Wilmot (21) Denison, (22) Wide Bay, (23) Herbert, (24) Fadden, (25) Dawson, (26) Lilley, (27) Bowman, (28) Brisbane, (29) Leichhardt, (30) Calare, (31) Eden Monaro, (32) Cook, (33) Lowe, (34) Barton, (35) Macquarie, (36) St George, (37) Phillip and (38) Macarthur under the (a) Child Care Act and children’s services program, (b) Aged or Disabled Persons Homes Act, (c) Aged Persons Hostels Act, (d) Handicapped Persons Assistance Act, (e) Homeless Persons Assistance Act, (0 State Grants (Home Care) Act, (g) delivered meals program, (h) welfare rights program, (j) personal care subsidy scheme and (k) Australian Assistance Plan during (i) 1975-76, (ii) 1976-77, (iii) 1977-78, (iv) 1978-79 and (v) 1 July 1979 to date.

Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

The information requested by the honourable member is not held in a form that would enable this question to be answered without very considerable effort. I am not prepared to direct that the staff resources which would be required be diverted from more essential duties.

Telephone Directories

Mr Staley:
LP

-On 16 October 1979, Mr Gillard asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications the following queston without notice:

Will the Minister consider the practicability of the inclusion of all telephone numbers covered by Access 80 in metropolitan telephone directories?

The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

To ensure general community awareness of the proposed Community Access 80 changes, telephone directories published before the introduction of the scheme in May 1 980 will include a concise explanation of the new charging arrangements that will apply. A more detailed explanation of the scheme will be included in the information pages of telephone directories to be distributed after its introduction. However, because of the already large size of the metropolitan directories and the extra costs that would be involved

Telecom does not at this stage intend to list subscribers who will have community call access to their central city zone in the metropolitan telephone directories. In the Sydney fringe area there are some 76,000 customers involved and to include them in the metropolitan directory would increase the size of the book by a minimum of 150 pages and involve additional costs of more than $300,000.

Subscribers within the Access 80 zones around the metropolitan areas can obtain free copies of the metropolitan directories, on request.

I might add however, that I have discussed this matter with both the Chairman and Managing Director of the Australian Telecommunications Commission and they have agreed to give the matter further consideration.

Postal and Telecommunications: Computers (Question No. 2225)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 27 September 1978:

  1. How many computers are (a) owned; (b) operated, (c) in the process of being purchased or (d) rented by his Department and statutory authorities and business undertakings under his control.
  2. What is the cost of purchase or rental of each computer.
  3. 3 ) For what purposes is each computer used.
  4. What is the nature of the data stored by each computer.
  5. What interconnections exist or will exist between any of these computers.
  6. Who has access to each computer.
  7. What savings in staff numbers have been achieved or are anticipated as a result of the installation or operation of each computer.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Details in relation to my Department and those Statutory Authorities that come within the responsibilities of myPortfolio which own, operate, rent or are in the process of purchasing computers are as follows:

The Postal and Telecommunications Department, the Special Broadcasting Service and the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal do not own, operate, or rent computers and are not in the process of buying any computers.

Australian Broadcasting Commission

1 ) ( a ) 3 ( 2 of which are not in use and are being disposed of).

2 (including one rented).

None.

l.

Cost of computers in use $73,625. Cost of purchase of 2 computers being disposed of $20,405

Rental $20,405.

COMPUTER IN USE $ 1 35,000 per annum.

Computers Owned: TV Program inventory, Engineering equipment purchase control.

Computers Rented: Payroll and Personnel Management; Financial Accounting; Concert Management; Statistical compilation; Engineering Contract Management; Documentation preparation; Computer program development.

Computers Owned: TV Program Inventory data; Engineering equipment purchase data.

Computers Rented: Payroll and Personnel data; Financial data; Engineering contract data; Concert subscriptions data; Statistical data.

None.

Authorised personnel within the ABC for official purposes; access by computer maintenance staff of Digital Equipment Australia is controlled and limited by ABC staff.

Introduction of the computer systems has made it unnecessary to recruit additional staff in some areas including, principally, Finance Department.

Australian Telecommunications Commission

1 ) Telecom Australia owns and operates five large scale computer systems, and one large scale system is rented: it is proposed to purchase this system during 1979. Two of the computer systems owned by Telecom Australia also include a number of components rented from the equipment supplier. Purchase of these components is undertaken on a continuing basis.

Telecom Australia also utilises some 54 mini computers for the control or monitoring of the telecommunications network and for research projects.

A further separate and dedicated computer system has also been utilised recently to support a limited 9 months trial of automated Directory Assistance.

The purchase cost of each large scale computer was:

The mini computer systems have been purchased by Telecom Australia at an approximate aggregate capital cost of $ 1.66m.

The computer system for the Directory Assistance trial has been hired under appropriate contractual arrangements at an approximate cost of $83,500.

  1. Telecom’s large scale computers support a wide variety of systems. These are:

StaffPay

Telephone Accounting

Trunk Records

Traffic Recording Analysis

Local Engineering Operations Processing and Recording ofData

Cable Ordering Project

Processing of Commercial and Statistical Material from

Stored Program Controlled Exchanges

Engineering Costing NSW

Automated Pay Variation Advice Pesonnel Information and Establishments System

Main Stores Accounting

Stores Central Ledger

Contract Monitoring System

Automation of Directory Compilation- Surname Section

Directory Distribution Lists

Directory Assistance

Accident and Compensation Statistics

Automatic Line Fault Analysis

Trunk and Junction Forecasting, Metropolitan

Automatic Disturbance Recording

Non-Exchange Services Records System

Additionally, a number of smaller tasks of a once-off or recurring nature are also processed.

Preparations are being made to use one of the large Honeywell 66/80 computers and a Honeywell minicomputer to investigate aspects of distributed data processing.

Several systems are processed by computer bureaux external to Telecom. These include:

Crossbar Provisioning and Planning Aid

Exchange Reference File

Material Budget Summaries

Switched Network Dimensioning

  1. The nature of the data stored by each computer system is that which is required to enable Telecom Australia to issue subscriber accounts, provide directory inquiry service and prepare telephone directories, undertake staff salary payments, maintain personnel and establishment details, maintain telecommunications network details, undertake maintenance of equipment, dimension the telecommunications network and undertake control and accounting of stores items.
  2. Data and file transfer facilities between Telecom’s two Honeywell H66/80 systems are provided by means of transporting magnetic tapes between the processing centres. It is proposed to provide an inter-system communications link between the two major data processing centres. Some minicomputer systems are connected to the telecommunications network for the purposes of monitoring and recording of the telecommunications network loading.
  3. Access to all computer systems is restricted to authorised Telecom personnel for the purposes of operating and maintaining the equipment, undertaking authorised program development and maintenance, the submission of input data and receipt of output from computer processing. In the case of Telecom Australia’s on-line computer network authorised personnel within User Departments or Directories have access to computing facilities via interactive terminals and remote batch facilities.

  4. Although some computer systems may reduce staff by directly eliminating manual effort, many computer programs and operational systems are developed either

    1. to extend the effectiveness of existing staff, by giving them enhanced access to data, analytical power and the like, or
    2. to permit staff to undertake tasks which due to their inherent size and /or complexity could not be undertaken at all if a computer were not available.

Such programs and systems usually do not directly save staff and may in some cases increase staff requirements.

For some systems, staff savings are notional, i.e. staff is saved’ by reducing the rate of staff growth and the savings are the additional people who would have had to be recruited if Telecom had kept carrying out activities in the same manual way as compared with the number needed to do the same things with the assistance of a computer. Given the continuing growth of Telecom’s business, staff savings are generally notional only.

Due to the above factors, estimating staff saved as a consequence of the use of computers is extremely difficult. The difficulty is compounded by the fact that computers have been used in the Australian Post Office (including some systems used by Australia Post after 1 July 1975) and Telecom over a period of more than 18 years, and some early systems have undergone progressive evolution by way of on-going enhancement and/or redevelopment: for these systems, estimation of staff savings by comparison with an ‘all manual’ environment is either impossible or of extremely dubious accuracy.

Staff savings achieved as a consequence of computer systems and programs are, of course, offset by the staff numbers employed in providing the data processing service: in Telecom’s case, about 727 persons currently employed in Information Systems Department and Branches. Many of this staff are engaged in developing systems and facilities to serve the future. The lead times involved in developing computer systems mean that employment is created in advance of benefits (of whatever nature) being achieved.

Australian Postal Commission

  1. (a)5

    1. b) 6 (including one rented)
    2. 6
    3. l

  2. The purchase cost of the five mini-computers already owned by Australia Post is as follows:

The purchase cost of the six proposed mini-computers is expected to amount to approximately $980,000.

The annual rental charge for the rented computer is currently $93,600.

  1. Owned

The two Prodata mini-computers are used for the processing of post office financial statements in Victoria and South Australia.

One of the three Data General mini-computers is being used for the development of new computer systems at Australia Post Headquarters. The remaining two are being used for the processing of accounting systems in Victoria and South Australia.

Rented

This computer, located in New South Wales, is being used for the processing of postal money orders throughout Australia.

Proposed Purchases

The six mini-computers planned for purchase will be used for stores accounting, business and manpower statistics, additional payroll reconciliations and other accounting systems.

  1. All of the computers operational or planned for purchase do or will store statistical information related to the functions described in the answer to part ( 3 ) of the Question.
  2. There are no interconnections between any of operational computers. There are no plans for any in the future.
  3. Authorised Australia Post operators are the only people allowed access to the computers.
  4. Staff savings of 50 have been achieved throughout Australia, as a result of the installation of the rented computer in NSW.

Further staff savings of 50 are expected as a result of the operation of computers already installed, or in the process of being purchased.

Overseas Telecommunications Commission (Australia) (l)(a)2

  1. 3 (including one rented)
  2. None

  3. l

    1. NCR8200-S7 1,000; WANG2200-$45,3 10.

The rented charge for UNIVAC 1 100/1 1 is $25,600 per month.

  1. Owned

NCR8200- This computer is dedicated to payroll processing for OTC employees.

WANG2200- This computer is used for econometric and financial modelling, manpower planning, technical planning exercises and engineering calculations.

Rented

page 3446

UNIVAC 1100/11

Processing of traffic data representing telephone, telex, telegraph and other services, in order to effect-

Financial accounting, including general and subsidiary ledgers.

Control of assets.

Planning and administrative work.

WANG2200- Data stored includes, planning models, personnel information, technical information, historic traffic data.

UNIVAC 1100/ 11 -Data stored includes:

Call data for traffic on the various services, and traffic statistics.

Customer, Telecom and international accounts data.

International tariff data.

Usage of facilities.

Financial ledgers.

Planning, administrative and management information.

UNIVAC 1 100/1 1-There is no direct connection with another computer.

WANG2200- The system provides technical computing facilities for planning staff. No direct staff savings are claimed, however, certain types of planning activity are only feasible using such a computer, and the quality and timeliness of planning information has been improved.

UNIVAC 1 100/1 1-The tasks described in 3(a) above represent approximately 85 per cent of the work performed on this computer, being the processing of more than half a million international call attempts per week. The data is received from the exchange equipment in the form of magnetic tapes. It is felt that no manual processing alternative would be feasible and, therefore, no ‘staff savings’ can be stated. The data, being on magnetic tape, requires a computer to process it and the volume of data is so vast that no manual system could meet the internationally agreed time requirements for financial settlement, nor could a manual system provide the operational reports needed to quickly indicate exchange and transmission system malfunctions and changing loads.

The remaining tasks have been required primarily to improve the quality and timeliness of information and no net savings in staff are claimed. However, these applications are assisting in containing the further growth of staff.

Postal and Telecommunications: Computer Information (Question No. 2255)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 27 September 1978:

  1. 1 ) In respect of each computer owned or operated by his Department and statutory authorities and business undertakings under his control, what information stored therein can be sold, hired, lent or given to any person or organisation other than properly authorised employees of his Department, authority or business.
  2. Under what circumstances can this information be (a) sold, (b) hired, (c) lent or (d) given.
  3. 3 ) On what occasions, and to whom, has any information been sold, hired, lent or given in the past.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Details in relation to my Department and those Statutory Authorities that come within the responsibility of my portfolio which own or operate computers are as follows.

My Department, the Special Broadcasting Service and the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal do not own or operate any computers.

Australian Broadcasting Commission

  1. to (3) No information stored in the ABC’s computer can be sold, or made available under a leasing agreement to unauthorised organisations or people. Currently, information is given in printed form to the Australian Taxation Office; the Commonwealth Superannuation Fund; the various medical and hospital funds; the ABC Credit Union; the ABC Staff Association, etc.

Australian Telecommunications Commission

  1. to (3) The output of some computer applications is specifically designed for transmission to parties external to Telecom, such as billing details to subscribers, delivery and payment information to contractors, directory output tapes to contractors for photocomposition of directories and, as a service to staff, salary deduction information to beneficiary organisations such as trade unions and insurance companies. Information of a statistical nature has been passed to government and semi-government authorities such as the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the former Department of Employment and Industrial Relations. The Staff Pay application transmits data directly by magnetic tape to the Government Actuary (in regard to furlough), the Department of Taxation (in respect of group certificates), the Commonwealth Bank (in respect of cheque reconciliation), and the Australian Government Retirement Benefits Office (in respect of deductions for retirement benefits). The Telephone Accounting application has provided data by magnetic tape to the Department of Social Security (in respect of pensioner rental concessions). No information has been sold, hired or lent. Any requests for non-sensitive information would be treated on their merits. Other than information of the type listed to other organisations, information would only be considered for supply which could be extracted from publicly available documents and publications.

Australian Postal Commission

  1. 1 ) No information is available currently to any person or organisation other than the properly authorised employees of Australia Post
  2. and (3) Not applicable.

Overseas Telecommunications Commission (Australia)

  1. 1 ) to (3) Apart from traffic, cost and facility summaries that are made available to other telecommunications organisations for financial settlement and joint planning purposes and the normal funds transfers of banking deposits and payroll deductions, no information is released outside the Commission. The confidentiality of individual transmissions comes under the protection of the Overseas Telecommunications Commission Act.

Australian Ownership of Mining Companies (Question No. 3030)

Mr Hodges:
PETRIE, QUEENSLAND

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 23 November 1978:

  1. 1 ) Has his attention been drawn to a telex message from the Queensland Premier to the Minister for Trade and Resources following a meeting with a number of mining companies operating in Queensland, in which criticism is made of the Commonwealth Government’s new mineral export guidelines.
  2. Has his attention also been drawn to an article in the Courier Mail of 17 November 1978 in which it was stated that the following companies had attended the meeting with the Premier: Conzinc Riotinto Australia, Utah, Comalco, Mt Isa Mines, Queensland Alumina, ThiessDampierMitsui, Thiess Bros, Houston Oil & Minerals, Blair Athol Coal, Capricorn Coal Development, Consolidated Rutile, Cudgen R.Z., Murphyores, Collinsville Coal and Peabody; if so, is he able to say whether each of these companies was represented at the meeting with the Premier.
  3. What is the level of Australian ownership in each of these companies.
  4. Which of these companies export their mined products to either their overseas parent companies or companies in which they have an interest.
Mr Howard:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes; I understand that the companies mentioned were represented at the meeting.
  3. The present level of beneficial Australian ownership in each of the companies referred to in part (2 ) is considered to be as set out in the following table; the figures shown do not take account of small shareholdings of a portfolio nature held by foreign interests.
  1. Information of a commercial nature provided to the Government to assist it in the administration of export controls is made available on a confidential basis. I am therefore not in a position to provide details of the kind sought in this part of the question.

Indirect Taxation (Question No. 3186)

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Treasurer, upon, notice, on 2 1 February 1 979:

  1. 1 ) When will the Report of the Commissioner of Taxation on the indirect tax system requested by the Government in June 1978 be available to the Parliament and the public.
  2. Will he give an assurance that no broad based indirect taxes of any description are under current consideration.
Mr Howard:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. and (2) I announced on 24 January 1979 that the Government had decided not to proceed further with consideration of the introduction of a broad based indirect tax. Given that the Commissioner of Taxation’s report to the Government which was received late in 1978 dealt with the practical administrative aspects of such a tax, I do not believe in the circumstances that it is appropriate to make the report public.

Energy Research (Question No. 3258)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 27 February 1979:

  1. What sums have been (a) allocated for or (b) expended on energy research by (i) the Federal Government, (ii) each of the State Governments, (iii) other government or semi-government authorities and (iv) private sources during (A) 1975-76, (B) 1976-77, (C) 1977-78 and (D) 1 July 1978 to date.
  2. Can he provide a breakdown of the areas where this research was undertaken and the amounts allocated to each area.
  3. Can he also provide the total expenditure for the research on a per capita basis for each period
  4. Can he state for each of the OECD countries for which information is available (a) the sums spent on energy research, (b) the areas where research was conducted and (c) the sums directed to each area during (i) 1976-77, (ii) 1 977-78, and (iii) 1 July 1 978 to date.
  5. Can he indicate in relation to part (4) the total research expenditure on a per capita basis.
Mr Newman:
Minister for National Development · BASS, TASMANIA · LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: ( 1), (2) and (3) The information sought is not available, earlier than 1976-77, when the first national energy R&D survey was conducted by my Department.

1976-77

Total expenditure on energy R & D in 1976-77 was $26.8m:

The per capita expenditure on Energy R, D & D in 1976- 77 was $A 1.89.

1977- 78

For the 1 977-78 financial year no national survey has been conducted and none is proposed. Details are, however, available of the major sources of expenditure by Commonwealth Departments and Authorities.

The major sources of expenditure by Commonwealth Departments and Authorities on energy R & D in 1977-78 were:

Per capita expenditure for 1 977-78 has not been estimated as the figures are not complete.

1978-79

A survey of energy R&D expenditure in 1978-79 is currently being undertaken by the Australian Bureau of Statistics on behalf of project SCORE, the biennial review of R & D in Australia conducted by the Department of Science and the Environment. It will cover the Commonwealth, State Tertiary and Private sectors. In the interim estimated expenditure is already available for major areas of expenditure by Commonwealth Departments and Authorities. This includes details of grants made under the National Energy Research, Development and Demonstration Program and funded from my Department ‘s appropriations in 1 978-79.

During 1978-79 a major stimulus to energy R & D in Australia was provided by the introduction of the National Energy Research, Development and Demonstration Program (NER, D & DP). Grants approved in the 1978-79 Program total $ 1 5.6m and include expenditure in 1 978-79 of $4m appropriated to my Department.

The major sources of expenditure by Commonwealth Departments and Authorities on energy R & D in 1978-79 were:

Details of Expenditure from the 1978-79 Appropriations for the 1978-79 National Energy Research, Development and Demonstration Program, CRTA, CSIRO and AAEC are set out below:

Per capita expenditure for 1978-79 has not been estimated as the figures will not be complete until after completion of the formal survey mentioned earlier.

  1. and (5) The items of information requested that are available are shown in the attached tables (A) and (B).

Notes to Tables (A) and (B)

  1. The expenditures of European Community Member countries do not include their contributions to EC programs.
  2. 1 977 breakdowns of expenditure are based on the IEA ‘s 1977 Review of Energy Policies and Programs of IEA Member countries. All other figures are taken from the 1 978 Review. Discrepancies between the 1977 figures in Table. B (from the 1977 Review) and those in Table A (1978 Review) appear to be caused by the use of different exchange rates to convert from national currencies to $US.
  3. Information is available to categorise only $3.7m of the total Austrian program of $ 1 6.5m.

This Day Tonight’ (Question No. 3420)

Mr Clyde Cameron:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 8 March 1979:

Will he again read his answer to Question No. 1680 (Hansard, 9 November 1978, page 2709) and give an answer as to the date on which the General Manager of the Australian Broadcasting Commission first informed him of the Commission’s intention to discontinue its This Day Tonight program.

Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I have again considered the honourable member’s previous question and my answer to that.

I cannot provide the honourable member with an indication of the exact date on which the General Manager may have informed me of the Commission’s plans to restructure its current affairs programming.

I reiterate to the honourable member, however, that there is no good reason why this matter should have been raised with me as the ABC is responsible for decisions taken about programming matters, and this is not an area in which I wish to interfere with the Commission ‘s independence.

Naturally, as part of my overall responsibility to the Parliament for the activities of the ABC, I ensure that I am kept informed generally about those activities. I would also add that the ABC is more than co-operative in ensuring that its Minister is aware of what its plans are.

National Energy Advisory Committee (Question No. 3588)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 28 March 1 979:

  1. Which members of the National Energy Advisory Committee are employed by, or hold beneficial interest in, companies or authorities engaged in oil or gas exploration, development, production or distribution.
  2. What is the nature of this employment or interest in each case.
Mr Newman:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) The members of the National Energy Advisory Committee and their principal occupation and /or employment are set out below:
Mr G J Lynch:
Minister for Industry and Commerce · FLINDERS, VICTORIA · LP

ch- Company Director, formerly Director, Esso Australia Ltd.

Mr R. Austen Chairman and Managing Director, Austen and Butta Ltd.

Mr M. D. Bridgland Managing Director, ICI Australia Ltd.

Mr G. Bruns Economic and investment consultant. Formerly Chief Economist, ANZ Bank.

Professor Emeritus F. B. Bull- Engineering consultant.

Mr J. B. Carter Principal Adviser, National Energy Office, Department of National Development

Mr D. Eckersley Primary producer.

Professor L. A. Endersbee-Dean of the Faculty of Engineering, Monash University.

Mrs M. M. Fitzgerald Alderman, St Peter’s Council.

Professor D. W. George- Vice-Chancellor, University of Newcastle and Chairman, Australian Atomic Energy Commission.

Professor S. Harris- Professor of Resource Economics, Australian National University.

Mr H. Hume- Director and General Manager, North Shore Gas Co. Ltd.

Mr D. J. Ives- Acting Director, National Energy Office, Department of National Development.

Mr B. Kirkwood Chairman, State Energy Commission, W.A.

Mr W. M. Lonie General Manager, Coal, BHP Co. Ltd.

Mr E. D. Murray State Electricity Commissioner, Queensland.

Professor D. J. Nicklin- Professor of Chemical Engineering, University of Queensland.

Mr J. D. Norgard- Chairman, The Pipeline Authority. Chairman, Australian Broadcasting Commission. Chairman, Metric Conversion Board.

Professor Emeritus J. W. Roderick- Former Head, School of Civil Engineering, University of Sydney.

Mr H. J. Souter- Formerly Secretary, Australian Council of Trade Unions.

Professor C. N. Watson-Munro- Wills Professor of Plasma Physics, University of Sydney.

Dr H. W. Worner Director, Institute of Industrial Technology, CSIRO.

Each member of the National Energy Advisory Committee has made a declaration to me of employment or other beneficial interest in companies or authorities engaged in oil or gas exploration, development, production or distribution. Members are expected to avoid conflict between public duty and private interest and are expected to declare, ahead of any Committee discussions, any private interest that might reasonably be held to be in conflict with their public duty. These procedures are broadly in accord with those adopted for similar governmental bodies.

The honourable member would also be aware of the inquiry concerning public duty and private interest chaired by the Honourable Sir Nigel Bowen. The procedures adopted for members of the National Energy Advisory Committee will be reviewed as necessary when the Government finalises its views on the report of the inquiry.

Mr David Rofe, Q.C. (Question No. 3603)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 29 March 1979:

  1. 1 ) In what legal actions is Mr David Rofe, Q.C, presently acting for the Commonwealth?
  2. In what legal actions has Mr David Rofe, Q.C, represented the Commonwealth during (a) 1975-76, (b) 1976-77 and (c) the period 1 July 1978 to date and what sums have been paid to Mr Rofe in each of those periods in respect of each action?
  3. What sums are still to be paid to Mr Rofe in respect of (a) completed and (b) incomplete actions?
Mr Viner:
LP

– The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) As at 29 March 1979, Mr David Rofe, Q.C, was not acting for the Commonwealth in relation to any legal proceedings. Mr Rofe was, however, acting in the following cases for Commonwealth officers, functionaries and statutory instrumentalities:

    1. Thomas Barton, ex parte the Official Receiver (public examination).
    2. Thomas Barton, ex parte the Official Receiver (application to have payment declared void).
    3. Donald William Thomas v. Demos Hadjapanyotis and Others.
    4. ) Thomas Moss v. Ian Torrance.
    5. Carmont v. Australian Broadcasting Commission.
    6. Trade Practices Commission v. George Weston Foods Pty Limited and Others.

  2. Mr Rofe acted for the Commonwealth in relation to the following proceedings and was paid fees as stated:

    1. during 1975-76 Commonwealth of Australia v. Muratore (paid $2 1 5 in September 1 975 ).
    2. during 1976-77 the proceedings referred to in (a) of this paragraph (paid $870 in September 1976 and $100 in December 1976) and the following additional proceedings- Gee v. Commonwealth of Australia (paid $825 in December 1977).
    3. during the period1 July 1 978 to 29 March 1979: the proceedings referred to in (a) and (b) of this paragraph- Commonwealth v. Muratore (paid $310 in August 1978) and the following additional proceedings- Regina v. David Allen Gee (paid $40,599 during the period ).
  3. As at 29 March 1979 no amounts were outstanding in respect of proceedings in which Mr Rofe has acted for the Commonwealth.

  4. Information in relation to matters in respect of which Mr Rofe acted for Commonwealth officers, functionaries and statutory instrumentalities for relevant periods mentioned in paragraph 2 of the honourable member’s question and the amounts paid to Mr Rofe in respect of each of those matters, is set out hereunder

    1. during 1975-76 the following proceedings referred to in(l):
    2. (paid $600 in July 1975).
    3. (paid $500 in April 1976).
    4. (Nil payment- matter did not proceed) and the following additional proceedings- Donald William Thomas v. David Gee (paid $8,0 1 9 during 1975-76).

Collector of Customs v. Wilh Wilhemsen Agency Pty Ltd (paid $387 in August 1975); Waller v. Australian Broadcasting Commission (paid $240 in February 1974 on first briefing in this matter and paid $2,300 on rebriefing in November 1975).

  1. during 1976-77: the following proceeding referred to in(l):
  2. (paid $175 in October 1976) the following proceedings referred to in (4)(a)- Thomas v. Gee (paid $3,496 in 1976-77) and the following additional proceedings- Application to Federal Court by Gail Barton, Lily Barton, Alexander Barton and Thomas Barton (paid $1,490 in March 1977); Appeal by Gail Barton, Lily Barton, Alexander Barton and Thomas Barton (paid $ 1 , 0 1 8 in March 1 977 );

Application by Thomas Barton for Annulment of Bankruptcy (paid $260 in March 1977).

  1. during the period 1 July 1978 to 29 March 1979-the following proceedings referred to in ( 1 ):
  2. (paid $20,02 1 .65 during the period ).

  3. (paid $ 190 during the period) and the following additional proceedings- Trade Practices Commission v. Pacific Film Laboratories Pty Limited (paid $2,875 in September 1978); Trade Practices Commission v. George Weston Foods Pty Limited and Others (paid $160 in September 1978 and $250 in November 1978).

    1. 5 ) In respect of matters mentioned in (4) above:
  4. no amounts were outstanding in respect of completed proceedings;
  5. an amount of approximately $15,000 was outstanding in respect of proceedings referred to in ( 1 )(c).

Post Offices (Question No. 361 1)

Mr Hodges:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 29 March 1979:

Where were post offices (a) closed down and (b) opened in (i 1973-74, (ii) 1974-75, (iii) 1975-76, (iv) 1976-77, (v) 1977-78 and (vi) the period 1 July 1978 to date in each Federal electoral division.

Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

The number of post offices closed and opened in each electorate, in each of these periods, is given in the following tables. Information for 1978-79 covers the period to 31 March 1 979. (The names of post offices closed and opened in each electorate, in each year, have been provided separately to Mr Hodges).

Harrisburg Nuclear Reactor Accident (Question No. 3635)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 3 April 1979:

Is he able to provide the following information in respect df the nuclear reactor accident at Three Mile Island, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA: (a) was the accident caused by a failure in the main reactor cooling system; if so, was a cloud of radioactive steam released because the reactor vessel was Unable to contain the pressure in the vessel; (b) were further releases of pressure necessary for the same reasons; (c) was radioactively-contaminated water released to the surrounding area; (d) was the level of radioactivity within the reactor vessel extremely high; if so, what were the levels, in both roentgens per hour and millirems per hour; (e) were the fuel elements damaged by the failure of the cooling system and the subsequent accident; (0 was contaminated material stored in auxiliary buildings; (g) how many dairy farms are situated in the area within a radius of 25 kilometres of the reactor; (h) did Charles Callinan of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission admit publicly that there had been serious contamination on the reactor site; (i) was the police force of the State of Pennsylvania asked to provide a helicopter to monitor events at the reactor immediately following the accident; if so, were they informed that radioactive steam had been released into the atmosphere; (j) what precautions had to be taken to safeguard workers at the plant; (k) what was the extent of contamination of workers immediately following the accident; and (1) was the State of Pennsylvania entirely dependent on the utility company operating the reactor for information about the accident.

Mr Newman:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to the Report of the (United States) President’s Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island, dated 30 October 1 979. A copy of the Report is available for reference in the Parliamentary Library.

Postal and Telecommunications: Opinion Polls or Surveys (Question No. 3768)

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 2 May 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many opinion polls or surveys have been commissioned or carried out by his Department in each year from 1975 to date and how many have not been completed.
  2. For each of the opinion polls or surveys, (a) which companies or private individuals were commissioned, (b) what was the subject matter and purpose and (c) what was the cost.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) Details in relation to opinion polls or surveys commissioned or carried out by my Department are shown on the following table:

Test Cricket Telecasts (Question No. 3800)

Mr O’Keefe:
PATERSON, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 2 May 1979:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to statements that country people particularly those in isolated areas are greatly concerned that the Australian Broadcasting Commission will not be televising Test Cricket.
  2. If so, will he give an assurance that there will be complete Test Cricket television broadcasts for all country people.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Yes. I have received a large number of representations from members and the general community concerning the granting by the Australian Cricket Board of exclusive television rights to cricket coverage to a commercial network. Many of these representations have come from residents of country areas.
  2. I cannot give such an assurance. Where exclusive rights rest with a commercial operator the ABC cannot unilaterally ignore such an agreement and proceed with coverage.

Coverage of sporting events on television is a matter for the appropriate sporting organisation and television operators, whether they be commercial or the ABC.

The government does not have a direct role in these matters, but obviously hopes that negotiations between all parties will result in all Australians receiving a coverage of those events which have traditionally been enjoyed.

North West Shelf Natural Gas Project (Question No. 3829)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 3 May 1 979:

  1. What is the expected capital infrastructure cost of developing the north West Shelf natural gas project
  2. What are the major components of the cost including, for example, port facilities, pipelines, wellheads, processing facilities and ships.
  3. Has the Heavy Industry Advisory Council made any estimates of the share of infrastructure spending that will go to (a) Australian firms and (b) overseas firms; if so, what are the shares.
  4. Since the Australian taxpayer under current arrangements will make concessions to the development costs of the project, have any studies been conducted to investigate ways in which the companies can be required to make reciprocal concessions to Australian firms to provide a greater share of the infrastructure.
Mr Newman:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The North West Shelf gas project is still the subject of a $50m project definition study and firm costs for the project have therefore not been announced. However, based on preliminary figures the Joint Venture companies estimate the project is likely to cost between $2,500 and $3,000m in 1977 dollars.
  2. The major components of the project and their estimated cost as announced by the Joint Venture are as follows:
  3. and (4) The Department of Industry and Commerce has advised that the Heavy Industry Advisory Council has made no such estimates; and that at the August meeting of Commonwealth/State Industry Ministers, a working group was established with directions to study the nature and extent of any problems involved in Australian manufacturers .achieving a greater share of the work for major development projects.

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act (Question No. 4016)

Mr Kevin Cairns:

asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 28 May 1979:

  1. 1 ) When will the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 be proclaimed?
  2. Has the Attorney-General received proposals for significant and numerous exclusions from the Act?
  3. Which Departments have suggested their own exclusion?
  4. Will the Attorney-General consider proclaiming the Act to cover as large a section of Public Service administration as possible and to minimise the classes of decisions declared by regulation to be not subject to judicial review under the Act?
Mr Viner:
LP

-The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) The Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1 977 will be proclaimed as soon as the Government has considered and reached a decision on any exclusions of classes of decisions from the provisions of the Act and any necessary legislation to give effect to the Government’s decision has been enacted. The matter is under consideration by Government at the present time.
  2. Yes.
  3. In its Third Annual Report the Administrative Review Council has indicated the nature and extent of the exclusions sought by Departments and agencies. I am giving consideration to tabling the Council’s full Report to me on this matter.
  4. See answer to question ( 1 ).

Television Services on Eyre Peninsula (Question No. 4146)

Mr Wallis:
GREY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 4 June 1979:

In view of his earlier announcement regarding plans to extend national television services to various areas of Eyre Peninsula, SA, when will the services be established.

Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member ‘s question is as follows:

I have advised the honourable member in the past that this project is of considerable magnitude and for that reason has required careful planning and lengthy technical studies so that optimum coverage can be achieved.

While the plan has not as yet been finalised nor submitted to me in final form for approval, officers of my Department have advised me that they expect to commence acquisition of sites on the Eyre Peninsula by the middle of next year. This would allow the necessary facilities to be progressively constructed and completed by the end of 1982.

A project of this size cannot be completed any more quickly. It may be possible, however, to commence the project earlier so that overall it can be brought to a conclusion sooner. I am aware of the strong desire of the residents to have television services and I have instructed my Department to achieve an earlier date of commencement if at all possible.

Brisbane 10C Telephone Exchange (Question No. 4179)

Mr West:
CUNNINGHAM, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 5 June 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has Telecom Australia installed a 10C trunk exchange at Brisbane.
  2. If so, what area will the Brisbane computer exchange cover.
  3. Does Telecom (a) intend phasing out existing manual assistance and (b) envisage extending some of the Brisbane 10C exchange functions to country areas; if so, what functions.
  4. What plans has Telecom made to overcome failures of a major trunk line system operating from a 10C exchange and what plans has it made for the failure of the 10C equipment itself.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

As a preamble to the answers to this and the series of related questions (4180-4183) asked by the honourable member for Cunningham, Telecom has provided the following background information to assist members’ appreciation of the general subject of 10C exchanges and the implications of their introduction into the Australian telephone system.

Until the advent of modern processor-controlled trunk switching systems, such as the 10C system, equipment design dictated a policy of increasing centralisation of residual manual assistance traffic following conversion of local exchanges to automatic working to achieve efficient and economical handling of such traffic.

With the IOC system it is possible to physically separate the control (operator) and switching functions of manual assistance traffic. The operator still controls the connection of: call but the circuit is established at the switching centre (the IOC exchange), not via the operator’s switchboard. The use of IOC equipment makes it possible therefore to still realise the significant cost savings and high switching efficiency attainable from centralisation of the traffic switching function, yet locate the manual operators’ positions remote from the location of the switching centre- in fact up to 800 km away. Telecom is currently reviewing its manual assistance policy to take advantage of this new flexibility with a view to retaining employment opportunities in more country areas, and to at least maintaining the present country to metropolitan ratio of manual assistance operators.

The answer to Question No. 4 1 79 is as follows:

1 ) Yes, at Woolloongabba.

This exchange will ultimately handle all ISO and all manually assisted international traffic originating in Queensland, plus all manually assisted trunk calls originating in the Nambour and Toowoomba areas, and selected Brisbane exchanges.

It will also perform STD trunk switching and charging functions for selected exchanges within Brisbane. Nambour and Toowoomba exchanges both have their own trunk switching exchanges (ARM ‘s) and the majority of STD traffic from these centres will be unaffected by IOC.

(a) No. (b) The extension of Brisbane IOC exchange functions is currently under review in the light of a revised policy on decentralisation of manual assistance operations.

Most capital city networks have multiple trunk machines, eg 10C and ARM (electromechanical). Trunking between trunk exchanges is arranged so that the service impact when a trunk switching machine or a major transmission bearer fails is minimised. Each of the Sydney trunk exchanges, for example, have large direct routes to each of the corresponding trunk exchanges in Melbourne. Thus, the loss of any one of the Sydney trunk exchanges would not completely cut off traffic flow between the two cities.

Bendigo 10C Telephone Exchange (Question No. 4180)

Mr West:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 5 June 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has Telecom Australia installed a 10C trunk exchange at Bendigo, Victoria.
  2. ) If so, are print outs, similar to the ones referred to in an article by Andrew McCathie in the Australian Financial Review of 2 May 1979, kept for the Bendigo exchange.
  3. Will he make available to the Parliament copies of the print outs, from November 1 978 to date.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. and (3) The ‘printouts’ referred to in the Financial Review are believed to be a copy of handwritten notes maintained by manual assistance operation supervisors for recording disturbances during shifts. While the maintenance of such notes is standard practice at all Manual Assistance

Centres Telecom believes that working documents of this nature would not provide meaningful information. 10C Telephone Exchanges (Question No. 4181)

Mr West:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 5 June 1979:

  1. 1 ) What are the economic reasons for the transfer of operator-assisted calls to the new 1 0C type of exchange.
  2. What are the relative costs of handling a call on the IOC and an older type of exchange.
  3. What sum per annum is the change saving each customer.
  4. To what extent have ways been explored of reducing costs on the conventional equipment.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Increased operator productivity, due to the sophistication of the manual assistance position, and cost savings made possible by the elimination of such things as paper dockets, manual call pricing and manual inputting of call details into the automatic accounting and billing system.
  2. Studies undertaken in 1 978 showed operator costs per call for a 10C exchange handling 2 million calls annually were almost 40 per cent lower, than a call handled at an older type of exchange.
  3. The savings to customers are indirect- improved efficiency due to 10C exchanges being one of several factors helping to contain basic charges.
  4. Refinements in technical design and operating practices over the years have virtually eliminated all scope for further cost savings using conventional equipment.

Brisbane 10C Telephone Exchange (Question No. 4182)

Mr West:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 5 June 1979:

  1. Does Telecom Australia intend closing existing manual assistance centres at Nambour and Toowoomba, Queensland.
  2. If so, (a) what arrangements are to be made for the Nambour and Toowoomba areas for operator assistance with trunk calls, (b) will calls first have to reach the computer at Brisbane and then be directed to one of the provincial exchanges, (c) will the failure of the trunk system from one provincial centre to Brisbane seriously disrupt STD traffic, (d) will the failure of the Brisbane 10C equipment seriously disrupt STD traffic from the provincial centres and (e) in the event of the failure of a major trunk line system or of the Brisbane 10C equipment, will operators at the Brisbane manual assistance centre still connect trunk calls to areas to which STD traffic has been disrupted.
  3. Do the operators have facilities which enable them to reach places to which STD is out of order or choked up.
  4. If there are no facilities, did they previously exist.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes, concurrently with the opening of the new 10C manual assistance operator suites at each of those centres.

  2. (a) and (b) Via Brisbane to the new positions in Nambour and Toowoomba or Brisbane Manual Assistance Centre.

    1. and (d) Irrespective of the switching system, some disruption to STD traffic would result if failure of a trunk system or the10C exchange occurred. Diversity is provided by spreading trunk circuits over available radio and coaxial bearers to provide some protection and to maintain a limited service if a bearer failure occurs. Similarly alternative routes via the Edison ARM automatic trunk exchange in Brisbane will provide some switching diversity and maintain limited service for STD traffic in the event of failure of the Woolloongabba10C exchange.
    2. Operators at the Brisbane (ARM) Manual Assistance Centre would have the capability to connect calls to areas to which STD traffic has been disrupted by the failure of a major trunk line system. However, as at most centres, the operators normally compete with subscribers for circuits on the STD Grid, and therefore would suffer disruption similar to that experienced by subscribers dialling STD.
  3. and (4) Independent circuits are available between some centres for operator use only and Brisbane operators would have a limited facility to enable them to reach places to which STD is out of order or heavily congested. With the closure of the Brisbane transit exchange the operator network will be limited to transit exchanges at Roma and Charleville and direct dial lines into Brisbane. 10C Telephone Exchanges (Question No. 4183)
Mr West:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 5 June 1979:

  1. In what centres has Telecom Australia installed10C trunk exchanges.
  2. On what date did Telecom begin installing the equipment in each of the centres.
  3. Is manual assistance available in each of the centres where the10C equipment has been installed.
  4. In the cases where manual assistance is available does Telecom envisage phasing out the service: if so, what is the timetable in each case and on what basis did Telecom decide to phase out each service.
  5. What was the basis for the decision to eliminate manual assistance in the centres where it previously existed.
  6. In the cases where manual assistance has been eliminated is the10C computer exchange the only means for handling trunk and international traffic to and from those centres.
  7. What is the greatest amount of downtime encountered in each of the months since November 1978 for each of the 10C exchanges now in operation.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Sydney (Pitt), Adelaide (Waymouth), Melbourne (Lonsdale), Brisbane ( Wooloongabba) and Bendigo. Installation of a10C exchange in Perth (Wellington) is in progress.
  2. Precise dates of the commencement of installation are not available but the following are the dates when the various10C exchanges were cutoverinto service:

Pitt(NSW)-September 1974

Lonsdale ( Vic. )-December 1975

Waymouth (SA)-August 1976

Bendigo (Vic)-October 1977

Woolloongabba (Qld)-March 1979

  1. , (4), (5) and (6) Manual assistance service is available to all telephone customers and the installation of10C exchanges does not mean the loss of this service.

Manual Assistance Centres (i.e. operator suites) have been retained or installed at each location where a10C exchange has been installed and will be retained or established at all future10C exchange locations. In some instances (e.g. Woolloongabba) the manual assistance operator positions associated with the 10c exchange will be installed at several different locations some distance from the10C switching equipment.

  1. The maximum downtime encountered on any occasion in each month since November 1 978 at each of the 10c exchanges in operation is tabled below. During a period of downtime calls proceeding are not affected; however new calls are not accepted.

Government Employees (Question No. 4234)

Mr Giles:
WAKEFIELD, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 7 June 1979:

  1. In which (a) Departments and Statutory Authorities, (b) Public Service divisions (1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th) or equivalent technical classifications and (c) States and Territories have reductions in numbers of Commonwealth public servants been made since January 1976.
  2. What has been the consequential saving in Government expenditure for the same period and in the same categories.
  3. Have these reductions been made without declaring Commonwealth public servants redundant.
  4. Can he say what changes have occurred since January 1976 in the total numbers employed by State and Northern Territory Government Departments and State and Northern Territory statutory authorities.
  5. Can he also say what have been the consequential changes in State and Northern Territory expenditures.
  6. What were the total Commonwealth Government outlays for all purposes for each State and the Northern Territory in (a) 1975-76, (b) 1976-77, (c) 1977-78 and what is the estimated outlay for (d ) 1 978-79.
  7. What was the budget surplus or deficit for each State and the Northern Territory in (a) 1975-76, (b) 1976-77, (c) 1977-78 and what is the estimated budget surplus or deficit for(d) 1978-79.
Mr Viner:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. (a) Since January 1976, the following departments and statutory authorities employing staff under the Public Service Act have had reductions in the numbers of public servants employed:

Departments-

Aboriginal Affairs

Administrative Services

Business and Consumer Affairs

Capital Territory

Construction (i)

Education

Employment and Industrial Relations (ii)

Environment, Housing and Community Development (iii)

Finance

Foreign Affairs

Industry and Commerce

National Resources (iv)

Northern Territory ( v)

Overseas Trade ( vi )

Prime Minister and Cabinet

Repatriation (vii)

Science (viii)

Transport

Treasury

Authorities, etc-

Australian Broadcasting Control Board (ix)

Australian Bureau of Statistics

Australian Film Commission

Australian Government Publishing Service

Australian Government Retirement Benefits Office

Australian Taxation Office

Bureau of Agricultural Economics

Bureau of Meteorology

Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics

Bureau of Transport Economics

Children’s Commission (x)

Commission on Advanced Education (xi)

Forestry and Timber Bureau

Hospitals and Health Services Commission (xii)

Industries Assistance Commission

Legal Aid Commission

National Library of Australia

Office of Parliamentary Counsel

Papua New Guinea Office

Patents, Trade Marks and Designs Office

Public Service Board (except Mandata)

Royal Australian Mint

Schools Commission

Social Welfare Commission (xiii)

Technical and Further Education Commission (xi)

Universities Commission (xi)

  1. The name of the Department of Construction was changed to the Department of Housing and Construction on 5 December 1978.
  2. The Department of Employment and Industrial Relations was abolished on 5 December 1978.
  3. The Department of Environment, Housing and Community Development was abolished on 5 December 1978.
  4. The Department of National Resources was abolished on 20 December 1977.
  5. The Department of the Northern Territory was abolished on 28 September 1978.
  6. vi) The Department of Overseas Trade was abolished on 20 December 1977.
  7. The name of the Department of Repatriation was changed to the Department of Veterans ‘ Affairs on 5 October 1976.
  8. The name of the Department of Science was changed to the Department of Science and the Environment on 5 December 1978.

  9. The Australian Broadcasting Control Board was replaced by the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal on 1 January 1977.

    1. The Children’s Commission was abolished in 1976.
  10. The Commission on Advanced Education, the Technical and Further Education Commission and the Universities Commission were replaced by the Tertiary Education Commission on 22 June 1 977.
  11. The Hospitals and Health Services Commission was abolished in 1978.

  12. The Social Welfare Commission was abolished in 1976.

    1. Since 1976, reductions in the numbers of Commonwealth Public Servants employed have occurred in the First, Second, Third and Fourth Divisions.
    2. Since 1976 reductions in the numbers of Commonwealth Public servants employed have occurred in the States of Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia, the Northern Territory and overseas.
    1. After making adjustments for movements into and out of Public Service Act coverage during the years 1976 to 1978, there has been a net reduction of 69 1 1 staff. Based on current average payments, current savings in government expenditure issued salaries and wages are estimated at $87m per annum. It is not practicable to calculate savings by category.
    2. Over the period to June 1979, 1250 Public Service Act staff who became surplus to requirements of departments and authorities were redeployed to other work areas without the issue of formal notice of redundancy. Seventy-seven staff were issed with notices of redundancy. Of these, 36 have since been redeployed, 11 others have retired on age or invalidity grounds and 10 have been retrenched. The Public Service Board is continuing its efforts to place the remaining 20 in other positions.

All of the retrenchments were made at the request of the staff concerned under the provisions of the relevant Public Service Arbitrator’s Determination.

  1. Information published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics indicates changes in employment as set out in the table below:
  1. No. The Government has no information on which to base a reply to this pan of the question.
  2. Commonwealth Government payments to the States in these years are shown below. The figures include payments for local government tax-sharing entitlements, which are made to the States for on-passing to local government authorities, but exclude payments made direct to local authorities. The payments are net of repayments of Commonwealth advances and sinking fund contributions on State Loan Council borrowings.

Comparable figures for the Northern Territory are not available. In 1975-76 and 1976-77 Commonwealth outlays in respect of the Northern Territory were subsumed in outlays on various Commonwealth programs and were included in appropriations of Commonwealth departments. In (977-78 the Commonwealth made a block payment of $53m direct to the Northern Territory to cover expenditure on functions for which executive responsibility was transferred to the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly on 1 January 1977. The Territory became self-governing on 1 July 1978 and the Commonwealth made a direct, block payment of $288. lm (net) in 1978-79 in respect of functions transferred to the Northern Territory Government. In both 1977-78 and 1978-79, however, the Commonwealth continued to incur significant expenditures in the Northern Territory on certain functions: 1979-80 will be the first year in which Commonwealth payments are made to the Northern Territory on the same basis as payments are made to the States.

  1. The published revenue budget results for each State for the years 1 975-76 to 1 978-79 are set out below:

Until 1 July 1978, when the Northern Territory achieved self-government, the public finances of the Territory were subsumed in the Commonwealth’s financial accounts. Accordingly, meaningful figures in respect of revenue budget results for the Territory for the years 1975-76 to 1977-78 are not available.

The Northern Territory budgeted for a balanced result in its Consolidated Fund (a fund in which recurrent and capital transactions are consolidated) for 1978-79 and finished the year with a surplus of $ 1 .Om in the Fund.

Foreign Affairs: Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption (Question No. 4318)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 7 June 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the total volume of fuel consumed per annum by motor vehicles operated by his Department and statutory authorities and business undertakings under his control.
  2. What is the annual cost of fuel consumed by motor vehicles referred to in pan ( 1 ).
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to the Minister for National Development’s answer to the House of Representatives Question No. 4328 (Hansard, 6 November 1979, page 2657).

Commonwealth Statutory Authorities (Question No. 4342)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 2 1 August 1979:

What Commonwealth statutory authorities were created in (a) 1976, (b) 1977, (c) 1978 and (d) 1979 to date.

Mr Viner:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Detailed lists of Commonwealth statutory authorities and the legislation under which they were established were provided in the First Report on ‘Statutory authorities of the Commonwealth’ presented by the Senate Standing Committee on Finance and Government Operations on 20 February 1979 (Senate Hansard, p. 18) and up-dated in the Committee’s Second Report presented on 15 November 1 979 (Senate Hansard, p. 2326). I would expect that the date of the establishment of the authority would coincide in the great majority of cases with the. stated date of the related legislation.

In the circumstances, I would not feel justified in authorising the considerable resources which would be necessary to extract the information and compile it in the form sought by the honourable member. If the honourable member could be more specific as to his interest, I would give the matter further consideration.

Public Service: Flextime (Question No. 4376)

Mr Clyde Cameron:
HINDMARSH, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

asked the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 21 August 1979:

Has his attention been drawn to reports of an allegation made by Ms Gay Thompson, South Australian Secretary of the Administrative and Clerical Officers’ Association, that flexi-time has become the greatest disguise for public servants with alcohol problems, if so, does it concern him that certain members of the Australian Public Service are abusing flexi-time in the manner described by Ms Thompson to a seminar of public servants held in Adelaide on 1 3 June 1 979.

Mr Viner:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I am aware of the media reports of the remarks made by the Secretary of the South Australian Branch of the ACOA, but understand that the point she made was that flexible working hours arrangements in the Public Service made it more difficult to identify staff with alcohol problems through patterns of absenteeism than would a system which required rigid daily hours of attendance. A recent review of flexible working hours by the Public Service Board did not reveal any widespread abuse of the system.

Consulate-General in Los Angeles (Question No. 4384)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Administrative Services, upon notice, on 2 1 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) When was the Australian Consulate-General in Los Angeles established.
  2. What properties were acquired, either (a) freehold or (b) leasehold.
  3. Have any of the properties or residences attached to the Consulate-General been disposed of since 1975.
  4. Were further properties acquired subsequently.
  5. What profit or capital gain was realised on the properties acquired before 1976 and sold subsequently.
  6. How does the sum realised for those properties compare with the price paid for properties acquired subsequently, either freehold or leasehold.
  7. What savings has the Government made on these transactions.
Mr John McLeay:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

    1. (A Trade Commission had been established earlier, in 1964).
  2. (a)-

  1. (a) The properties listed in (2) (a) above were sold in June 1976 on closure of the post. The sale prices were $A276,422, $A2 11,382 and $A109, 756 respectively.

    1. b) 454m2 of the Consulate-General office was sublet for the remainder of the term of the lease at $A23,792 per annum.

  2. Two leases were taken up when the post was reopened in 1979:

Consul-General’s residence at $A74,300 per annum for 2 years increasing to$A82,000 for 1 2 months.

Office space of 1 79m2 at $A 1 7,395 per annum.

  1. The excess of the sale prices of the three residences over the purchase prices was $A 188,494. This reduced to a net $A 153,934 after the deduction of sale commissions and associated costs.
  2. to (7) No residential properties have been purchased since the re-opening of the post in 1979 to allow a direct comparison with the gross realisation on the sale of the three properties of $A597,600 (the cost of the lease of a residence for the Consul-General is given in answer to (4) ). The cost of the additional office space required over the remainder of the lease is $A 1 7,395 per annum. Because of the sub-lease of portion of the original office accommodation, current rental outlays for office accommodation for the Consul-General are $A6,379 per annum less than rentals paid prior to closure of the post.

Horton Report (Question No. 4389)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice, on 2 1 August 1.979:

What action is being taken to implement the Horton Report.

Mr Ellicott:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to the Ministerial Statement on Assistance to Public Libraries I made on 13 November 1979 (Hansard, 13 November 1979, pages 2887 to 2889).

Diplomatic Asylum (Question No. 4416)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 22 August 1979:

What progress has been made with the (a) draft Convention on Territorial Asylum and (b) question of diplomatic asylum which Australia sponsored at the United Nations General Assembly in 1974 and 1975.

Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. A diplomatic conference was convened in Geneva in 1977 to adopt a Convention on Territorial Asylum but failed to complete its consideration of all the draft articles submitted. No decision has been taken on reconvening the conference. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has continued his consultations with governments on thus matter and in his latest report to the General Assembly has stated that in the light of these consultations it would appear that the convening of a future session of the conference may be premature at the present. The matter is, however, being pursued by the High Commissioner who will report on further progress in due course.
  2. At its thirtieth session in 1975, the United Nations General Assembly debated the report of the SecretaryGeneral on the question of diplomatic asylum which had been prepared at the request of the General Assembly at its twenty-ninth session in 1974, and decided to give further consideration to this question at a future session of the General Assembly. Informal consultations indicate that more time may be needed before further consideration of this question should take place. The Government will continue to keep the matter under review, so that if and when it appears that the time is ripe for further consideration the question can be raised for consideration at a future session of the General Assembly. The Government believes that the discussion of the question at the General Assembly in 1974 and 1975 was both timely and valuable and it is confident that the discussion will bear fruit eventually in the form of a deeper international understanding of the humanitarian considerations behind the practice of diplomatic asylum.

Exploration and Use of Outer Space (Question No. 4431)

Dr Blewett:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 22 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has Australia signed and ratified the Convention on Registration of objects launched into Outer Space; if not, why not.
  2. Has Australia signed and ratified the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and use of Outer Space, including the moon and Other Celestial Bodies.
  3. Does this Treaty affirm that States shall bear international responsibility for their national activities and refers to the State on whose registry an object launched into outer space is carried.
  4. Has Australia signed and ratified the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects.
  5. Does this Treaty establish international rules and procedures concerning the liability of launching States for damage caused by their space objects.
  6. Does the effectiveness of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies and the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects depend on the establishment of a central register of objects launched into outer space as agreed upon in the Convention of Objects launched into Outer Space.
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Australia is not a party to the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space. The matter, however, is under consideration.
  2. The Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies was ratified by Australia on 10 October 1967 and it entered into force on that date.
  3. Article VI of the Treaty obliges States Parties to the Treaty to bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies. The Treaty refers to the State on whose registry an object launched into space is carried, principally in Article VIII.
  4. Australia acceded to the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects on 20 January 1975.
  5. Yes.
  6. The effectiveness of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies and the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects is not entirely dependent on the establishment of a central register of objects launched into outer space as referred to in the ‘Convention On Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space’ but it has been felt that as the number of space objects would progressively increase, it would become more necessary to have an adequate means of identifying different objects, such as a State Register and a central register maintained by the SecretaryGeneral of the United Nations, and that a mandatory system of registering objects would contribute to the application and development of international law governing the exploration and use of outer space.

Prime Minister and Cabinet: Uranium (Question No. 4445)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 22 August 1979:

What are the (a ) maximum and ( b) minimum estimates of the (i) past and (ii) projected proportion of the costs of administration of his Department devoted to the marketing, use, supervision, control and assessment of Australia’s uranium ore and/or the products, services and activities derived from its existence.

Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

A number of positions has been allocated in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet for activities devoted to some aspect of the marketing, use, supervision, control and assessment of Australia’s uranium ore and/or the products, services and activities derived from its existence. It is estimated that in 1978-79 the salaries and other administrative expenses represented 1.8 per cent of the costs of administration of the Depanment.

It is estimated that in 1979-80 the costs described above will represent 1.3 per cent of the costs of administration of the Depanment of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Activities related to uranium matters have been undertaken by a number of officers of the Depanment of the Prime Minister and Cabinet from time to time as pan of their normal duties. It is not practicable to provide a satisfactory estimate of the costs of these activities.

Trade and Resources: Uranium (Question No. 4446)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 22 August 1979:

What are the (a) maximum and (b) minimum estimates of the (i) past and (ii) projected proportion of the costs of administration of his Depanment devoted to the marketing, use, supervision, control and assessment of Australia’s uranium ore and /or the products, services and activities derived from its existence.

Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

A number of positions have been allocated in my Depanment specifically for activities devoted to some aspect of the marketing, use, supervision, control and assessment of Australia’s uranium ore and/or the products, services and activities derived from its existence. In addition an Australian Uranium Export Office and a Uranium Advisory Council have been established. The direct costs of operating these two organisations appear separately in the appropriations of my Depanment.

It is estimated that in 1979-80 the total salaries and other administrative expenses of these activities would represent 3.3 per cent of the costs of administration of my Depanment. I would expect the costs to remain at much the same level in future years. Only those items of appropriation dealing with the general administration of the Depanment have been included in the base figure as costs of administration.

Foreign Affairs: Uranium (Question No. 4447)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 22 August 1 979:

What are the (a) maximum and (b) minimum estimates of the (i) past and (ii) projected proportion of the costs of administration of his Depanment devoted to the marketing, use, supervision, control and assessment of Australia’s uranium ore and /or the products, services and activities derived from its existence.

Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

A number of positions has been allocated in my Depanment specifically for activities devoted to some aspect of the marketing, use, supervision, control and assessment of Australia’s uranium ore and /or the products, services and activities derived from its existence. It is estimated that in a full year the salaries and other administrative expenses would represent 0.02 per cent of the costs of administration of the Depanment.

Activities related to uranium matters have been undertaken by a number of officers of my Depanment from time to time as pan of their normal duties. It is not practicable to provide a satisfactory estimate of the costs of these activities.

It is estimated that in 1979-80 the costs described above will represent 0.02 per cent of the costs of administration of my Depanment.

These figures do not include the costs, met by my Department, in respect of the appointment of Mr Justice Fox as Ambassador-at-Large for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Safeguards. Details of those costs were provided in my answer to Senator Button’s question upon notice of 29 May 1979 (Question No. 1641) and appear in Hansard of 23 August 1979.

Science and the Environment: Uranium (Question No. 4450)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Science and the Environment, upon notice, on 22 August 1979:

What are the (a) maximum and (b) minimum estimates of the (i) past and (ii) projected proportion of the costs of administration of the Department of Science and the Environment devoted to the marketing, use, supervision, control and assessment of Australia’s uranium ore and/or the products, services and activities derived from its existence.

Mr Groom:
LP

-The Minister for Science and the Environment has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

A number of positions have been allocated in my Depanment specifically for activities devoted to some aspect of the marketing, use, supervision, control and assessment of Australia’s uranium ore and for the products, services and activities derived from its existence. It is estimated in a full year the salaries and other administrative expenses would represent 0.86 per cent of the costs of the administration of the Depanment.

Activities related to uranium matters have been undertaken by a number of officers of my Depanment from time to time as pan of their normal duties. It is not practicable to provide a satisfactory estimate of the costs of these activities.

It is estimated that in 1979-80 the costs described above will represent 0.80 per cent of the costs of administration of my Department.

Training Programs (Question No. 4452)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 22 August 1978:

  1. Do Education Programs for the Unemployed Youth courses provide unemployed youth with several weeks of technical training in non-certified skills for no specific employment vacancies.
  2. What is the estimated commercial value of any productive work done by the trainees during the training:
  3. How many teachers does the scheme employ as a fulltime employment equivalent per 1 00 trainees on average.

  4. What is the cost per trainee of the scheme in terms of

    1. additions to unemployment benefit income for trainees;
    2. teacher salaries and (c) other costs.
  5. How many trainees on average are listed as (a) National Employment and Training systems participants and (b) unemployed.
  6. What would be the extra cost or estimated cost per trainee on average to pay them minimum award wages for approved labour-intensive public works and abolish the training scheme and the associated benefits and allowances, assuming that all non-labour costs for these projects were met by public authorities from other sources.
  7. What assessment is made of the comparative effectiveness of the scheme and of subsidised public works in providing job satisfaction, continuing employment and increased consumer demand to boost economic recovery.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The Minister for Education has provided the following reply to the honourable member’s question:

  1. and (2) EPUY courses are aimed at assisting unemployed young people whose inadequate levels of basic educational skills constitute a barrier to their obtaining regular employment. The courses therefore place emphasis on the development of basic literacy and numeracy skills. EPUY courses are also designed to help improve attitudes to work and to raise the level of confidence of young people with a view to improving their chances of gaining employment. The program’s aims are clearly educational.
  2. Statistics are available only for four States. Average effective F/T teachers per 100 students are:

South Australia- 13.

New South Wales- 14.

Queensland- 17.

Victoria- 21.

  1. All students are paid an incidentals allowance of $6.00 per week in addition to receiving the equivalent of unemployment benefit. The EPUY program engages different categories of teachers, some on a full-time basis, some parttime. A more accurate indication of costs emerges from cost per student per week. Overall costs on this basis currently range from $70 to $ 105.
  2. All students undertaking courses are registered as unemployed. EPUY students are identified as a separate group for NEAT purposes and are paid the benefit and allowance referred to in (4).
  3. It is not possible to determine the difference in cost per trainee should they be paid award wages for labourintensive public works rather than be involved in the EPUY program. The Commonwealth contribution to the EPUY program in 1979-80 in addition to the provision of unemployment benefits and incidental allowances, is $3. 7m. These funds are allocated through the State Steering Committees to Technical and Further Education Authorities for the payment of teachers’ salaries, the purchase of equipment and supplies and to meet certain administrative costs. At the same time these authorities contribute to the funding of courses through the provision of facilities and equipment plus the provision of particular administrative services for which no charges are made. A further administrative item which would be necessary to assess in making comparisons would be the administrative cost of providing allowances through the Commonwealth Employment Service.
  4. Because EPUY is an educational program designed to assist young people in seeking and obtaining employment, it is not relevant to make the comparison suggested.

Consumer Price Index (Question No. 4505)

Mr Willis:
GELLIBRAND, VICTORIA

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 29 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the estimated effect on the CPI of a 1 per cent increase in the price index of (a) materials used in home building and (b) materials used in building other than home building.
Mr Howard:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. and (2) There is no simple relationship between increases in the price indexes referred to in the question and increases in the CPI. For example, if a one per cent increase in building material prices were brought about by a general increase in wage levels, the effects of that general increase could be expected to be fully reflected in the CPI in due course; on the other hand, a similar increase in building material prices brought about by an increase in the price of (say) copper would eventually be reflected in the CPI only to the extent that items in the CPI regimen were affected by retail price increases consequent upon the copper price increase.

Consumer Price Index (Question No. 4506)

Mr Willis:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 29 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the estimated effect on the CPI of a 1 per cent increase in the price index of materials used in the manufacturing industry.
  2. 2 ) What is the estimated lag for the full effect to occur.
Mr Howard:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to my answer to Question No. 4505 in today’s Hansard.

Consumer Price Index (Question No. 4507)

Mr Willis:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 29 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the estimated effect on the CPI of a 1 per cent increase in the price index of articles produced by manufacturing industry.
  2. 2 ) What is the estimated lag for the full effect to occur.
Mr Howard:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to my answer to Question No. 4505 in today’s Hansard.

Consumer Price Index (Question No. 4508)

Mr Willis:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 29 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the estimated effect on the CPI of a 1 per cent increase in the Reserve Bank ‘s index of import prices.
  2. What is the estimated lag for the full effect to occur.
Mr Howard:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to my answer to Question No. 4505 in today’s Hansard

Postal and Telecommunications: Motor Vehicles (Question No. 4534)

Mr Innes:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 29 August 1979:

  1. How many (a) V8, (b) 6 cylinder and (c) 4 cylinder vehicles are operated by (i) Australia Post, (ii) Telecom Australia, (iii) his Department and (iv) the Overseas Telecommunications Commission.
  2. How many vehicles in each category in part (1) are air-conditioned.
  3. Why does his Department or any of the statutory bodies under his responsibility operate, in an energy depleted world, 8 cylinder vehicles.
  4. Will he change the present ratio of vehicle acquisitions.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The following shows the number of vehicles operated by the nominated organisations within my portfolio:

    1. V8 vehicles:
    1. Australia Post: 52
    2. Telecom: 14
    3. Postal and Telecommunications Department: nil

    4. OTC:5

    5. b ) 6 cylinder vehicles:
    1. Australia Post: 1,527
    2. Telecom: 5,000
    3. Postal and Telecommunications Department: 2
    4. OTC: 21

In addition, Telecom operates 6,000 heavy trucks which have either V8 or 6 cylinder engines.

  1. 4 cylinder vehicles:

    1. Australia Post: 683
    2. Telecom: 11,000
    3. Postal and Telecommunications Department: nil
    4. OTC:37
    1. Of the vehicles shown in part (1), the following are air-conditioned:

  2. a ) V8 air-conditioned vehicles:

    1. Australia Post: 12
    2. Telecom: see 2 (b) (ii)
    3. Postal and Telecommunications Department: nil
    4. OTC:5
  3. b ) 6 cylinder air-conditioned vehicles:

  4. Australia Post: 21

    1. Telecom: 456 (includes V8 and 6 cylinder vehicles)
    2. Postal and Telecommunications Department: 2
    3. OTC: 1

  5. 4 cylinder air-conditioned vehicles:

    1. ) Australia Post: nil
    2. Telecom: 32
    3. Postal and Telecommunications Department: nil
    4. OTC: nil
    1. A majority of the V8 vehicles operated by Telecom and Australia Post are trucks and this level of power is consistent with the required carrying capacity of the vehicles. Other V8 vehicles were acquired prior to the current drive to conserve liquid fuel, and these will be replaced progressively with smaller engined vehicles. I am assured that the selection of vehicles, nowadays, is based on the use of the smallest and lightest vehicle operationally suitable for the field work and geographic location involved.
    2. The ratio of vehicle acquisitions by the four bodies has changed to accord with the conservation policy referred to in part (3).

Australian Capital Territory: Community Grants (Question No. 4541)

Mr Innes:

asked the Minister for the Capital Territory, upon notice, on 29 August 1 979:

Having regard to his announcement of 22 August 1 979 listing available funds for (a) community, (b) welfare, (c) arts and (d) sporting grants by his Department within the Australian Capital Territory what grants in each of these categories were made by his Department or any other Federal Government Department disbursing funds for the same purposes in each of the last 5 financial years.

Mr Ellicott:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I am informed by my Department that:

Not all the Departments listed use the same definitions of ‘community’, ‘welfare’, ‘arts’ and ‘sports’. Hence comparisons between Departments must be made by a detailed examination of the particular grants in each case. Some Departments (e.g. Home Affairs) provide assistance to groups which are not strictly locally based ACT community groups.

Figures are provided for the following Departments:

Administrative Services

Attorney-General’s

Capital Territory

Education

Employment and Youth Affairs

Health

Home Affairs

Immigration and Ethnic Affairs

Social Security.

A table which summarises the grants provided by each Department is shown below:

92 Octane Petrol (Question No. 4554)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 30 August 1979:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to reports (News, 22 August 1979) that the 92 octane petrol produced by Caltex has claimed 3 1 per cent of the company’s petrol sales in Sydney, and up to 35 per cent in Newcastle in the first week since it was launched.
  2. Is it a fact that a 30 per cent swing to 92 octane petrol throughout Australia would save $70 million a year in oil imports; if so, will he request other oil companies to introduce 92 octane petrol.
  3. Did he endorse the call by the National Energy Advisory Committee for the introduction of 92 octane petrol over a year ago; if so, why has (a) it taken so long for this type of petrol to be introduced and (b) only one company adopted the recommendation.
Mr Newman:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes. I understand that 92 octane motor spirit accounted for about 1 7 per cent of Caltex sales in New South Wales in the month of October 1979.
  2. and (3) See the report of the National Energy Advisory Committee ‘Motor Spirit- Octane Ratings and Lead Additives’ of February 1978. The Government supports increased production of 92 octane motor spirit but believes decisions in this regard should be made on a commercial basis by the companies concerned.

Federal Narcotics Bureau (Question No. 4566)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 30 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) Who investigates allegations of charges of graft within the Federal Narcotics Bureau.
  2. How many investigations of alleged graft have been undertaken within the Bureau in each year since 1 970.
  3. What was the result of each investigation.
Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Up until June 1979 investigations into allegations of graft or malpractice involving officers of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics were undertaken by nominated officers from within the Bureau under direction from senior officers of the Department. In those instances where allegations involved both Narcotics Bureau and Police officers, investigations were carried out by the appropriate Police Force in consultation with the then Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.

On 19 June this year the Department established an Internal Affairs Unit, in line with the recommendations contained in a report of the Law Reform Commission, to undertake the investigation of allegations and complaints against Departmental officers including officers of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.

  1. Investigations into alleged graft or malpractice involving officers of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics have been undertaken as follows: 1970-nil; 1971- nil; 1972- nil; 1973-1; 1974-2; 1975- 1; 1976-4; 1977-4; 1978-5; 1979-21 (up until 7 November 1979).
  2. Each investigation established that the allegations or complaints were unsubstantiated with the exception of the following instances where action was taken as indicated. 1974- The Narcotics Bureau commenced investigations into one of its officers who was arrested and charged on 29 May 1975. The officer was subsequently convicted and received an effective maximum sentence of twelve years. (House of Representatives Question No. 4275 refers.) 1976- Four officers were charged with offences under the Public Service Act but the charges were subsequently dismissed by an Appeal Board. Three of the officers resigned following the Appeal Board decision.

In addition to the above the Government announced on 1 June 1979 that an investigation was to be made by a joint police group into allegations involving an unnamed officer of the Narcotics Bureau in Sydney. The report of this group is to be made to the Attorney-General.

Australian Citizenship and Permanent Residence (Question No. 4574)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 11 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many persons have been refused (a) entry into Australia as permanent residents on security grounds (b) Australian citizenship on security grounds in each of the last 10 years.
  2. How many persons have subsequently been allowed (a) permanent entry and (b) citizenship.
  3. Has the change in any individual case resulted in a breach of or threat to Australian security.
  4. What procedures exist for persons disadvantaged by security reports to test the factual basis of such reports.
  5. What procedures exist for the factual basis of the reports to be evaluated by his Department.
Mr MacKellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. (a) No statistics are kept. (b) Applications for Australian citizenship refused on security grounds:
  1. (a) Not applicable. (b) Applications for Australian citizenship refused on security grounds and subsequently approved:
  1. Migrant entry- not applicable. Citizenship- not as far as I am aware.
  2. and (5) My Department depends on advice received from the appropriate specialist Government agency. Although there is now no judicial or administrative review of decisions relating to security assessments in such matters as visa, entry permits, deportations and citizenship, the Government has announced its intention to establish a Security Appeals Tribunal to review adverse or qualified security assessments and any supporting information supplied by A.S.I.O. Access to the Tribunal will be available to applicants in appropriate cases.

Defence Force Retirement Benefits Scheme (Question No. 4575)

Mr Holding:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 1 1 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has his attention been drawn to the economic disadvantages experienced by many ex-servicemen whose total income is derived from funds paid under the Defence Force Retirement Benefits Scheme.
  2. Was this matter the subject of an inquiry by the Joint Select Committee on Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Legislation (the Jess Committee) and later by the Bonnett Inquiry whose report dated 10 February 1978 was referred to him in March 1978.
  3. What were the basic recommendations of the Bonnett Report.
  4. Will he make this report available to Members of the Parliament.
  5. What action does he propose to take in respect of the recommendations of the Bonnett Inquiry.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) I am aware of the suggestion that there are anomalies and inequities under the Defence Forces Retirements Benefits Scheme, and these have been among the subjects investigated by the Joint Select Committee on Defence Forces Retirements Benefits Legislation and the R. N. Bonnett Enquiry into the Defence Forces Retirements Benefit Act 1948.
  2. and (4) Copies of the R. N. Bonnett Report are available in the Parliamentary Library and the Table Office.
  3. See the statement in the House of Representatives by the Minister for Defence on 20 November 1979 (Hansard, pages 3 187-8).

Post Offices: Saturday Morning Service (Question No. 4589)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 1 1 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) On what date and at what locations have (a) general and (b) non-official post offices in New South Wales ceased to provide a Saturday morning service from 1 July 1978 to date.
  2. In how many cases was closure initiated by the postmaster.
  3. If closure was not initiated by the relevant postmaster, who initiated action for closure.
  4. What was the number of work units earned at each non-official post office at the time of closure.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: ( l)(a) Nil. (l)(b)and(4)-

  2. In all cases other than the 24 referred to in part (2) above, Saturday morning closures were initiated by Australia Post.

Common Fund (Question No. 4607)

Mr Howe:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 13 September 1979:

  1. What specific commitments did Australia make at the UNCTAD Conference held in Manila in May 1979?
  2. What will be the financial commitment of Australia to the (a) $400m first window and (b) $3 50m second window funds in 1979-80 and in subsequent years?
  3. What contributions have been promised to the funds by other countries than Australia?
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) At the Fifth United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD V) in Manila, the Prime Minister indicated Australia’s continued support for the Common Fund. In particular, he pledged that Australia would make an effective contribution to the Second Window and urged other countries to do likewise.
  2. I am not in a position at this time to estimate what Australia ‘s financial commitment to the Common Fund will be. (a) The basis of assessing the mandatory contributions to the First Window has not as yet been determined and is the subject of continuing discussions, (b) Contributions to the Second Window will be on a voluntary basis and Australia has refrained from making any specific offer until such time as the actual scope of the operations of the Second Window and an appropriate cost-sharing formula has been determined. Most other countries have adopted this position. We have however joined that group of countries firmly committing themselves to financial contributions to both the First and Second Windows.
  3. The following contributions have been promised to the funds by countries other than Australia:

Philippines-$US50m of which $25m is for the Second Window.

India-$US25m of which $5m is for the Second Window.

Indonesia- $US25m of which $lm is for the Second Window.

Malaysia- $US 1 m for the Second Window.

Thailand-$US1m for the Second Window.

Singapore- $US250,000 for the Second Window.

Yugoslavia- $US30m for the Common Fund as a whole.

Costa Rica- $US 1 m for the Common Fund as a whole.

Kenya- $US 1 m for the Common Fund as a whole.

Norway-$US25m of which $22m is for the Second Window.

Netherlands-$US25m of which $ 1 7m is for the Second Window.

Sweden-$US5.5m for the Second Window.

Belgium-$US6.Sm of which $3m is for the Second Window.

Denmark-$US2.3m for the Second Window.

Austria- $US2m for the Second Window.

Finland-$US2m for the Second Window.

OPEC-$US 100m to the Common Fund as a whole.

In addition, the following countries have undertaken to make contributions to the Common Fund without specifying the amount or which window they may wish to have their contribution directed to: Australia, Canada, China, Federal Republic of Germany, Ireland, Japan, Luxembourg, Mexico, Republic of Korea, Switzerland, United Kingdom.

Uranium Exports (Question No. 4624)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 13 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) On which dates and from which ports has uranium ore, yellowcake or other uranium products been exported from Australia since 1975?
  2. What was the quantity and value of exports in each case?
  3. In which cases was the uranium from (a) the Australian Atomic Energy Commission stockpile, (b) Mary Kathleen and (c) other sources?
  4. What was the customer country, company or power utility in each case?
  5. Where was each export processed (i.e. through hexafluoride conversion and enrichment) for use?
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Exports of uranium concentrates have taken place from Townsville, Brisbane and Sydney.
  2. and (3) The total quantity of uranium concentrates exported from Australia from 197S to 12 November 1979 is of the order of 4,000 short tons of uranium concentrates valued in excess of $200m, of which less than 2,000 short tons have been drawn from the Commonwealth’s uranium stockpile.
  3. Customer countries have been Japan, the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany where, in each case, the uranium has been used for electricity power generation.
  4. These exports are being converted to uranium hexafluoride either in the United Kingdom, Canada or the United States; enrichment is taking place in the United States.

Petroleum Products: Price Rises (Question No. 4634)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) What were the dates of notification by companies to the Prices Justification Tribunal of proposed increases in the price of petroleum products since July 1 978.
  2. What (a) companies, (b) products and (c) proposed price rises, were involved in each case.
Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. and (2) Details of price notices lodged by companies are treated as confidential by the PJT unless the notice is examined at a public inquiry.

Since July 1978 the PJT has held two public inquiries into the prices of petroleum products and details relating to those inquiries are contained in Schedule A.

Mormon Church (Question No. 4645)

Mr John Brown:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 18 September 1979:

  1. How many representatives of the Mormon Church have entered Australia on temporary residence visas during the period 1 January 1 972 to 3 1 August 1 979.
  2. How many representatives of other churches have entered Australia on temporary residence visas during the same period.
  3. Can he say which person or organisation (a) pays the fare of representatives of the Mormon Church who enter Australia and (b) is responsible for supporting representatives of the Mormon Church during the period that they remain in Australia, on temporary residence visas.
Mr MacKellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) Statistics are generally not maintained on the number of representatives from individual churches and religious organisations entering Australia on temporary residence visas.

However the numbers of persons who have arrived in Australia on temporary residence visas specifically for religious purposes are as follows:

  1. In nominating a person for entry to Australia for temporary residence, to perform religious, pastoral or missionary activities the sponsoring organisation in Australia undertakes to: be responsible for the living and accommodation expenses in Australia of the nominee and dependants; arrange suitable accommodation for the nominee and dependants; ensure that the nature of activities specified are not varied without the prior approval of the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs; ensure, where applicable, that in the employment of the nominee all relevant legislation and awards will be observed; be responsible for ensuring that the nominee and dependants leave Australia on the completion of the activities or should these activities be terminated, and to be responsible for any costs that may be involved; notify the Depanment of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs when the nominee and dependants leave Australia. Responsibility for the payment of fares would be a matter for determination between the religious organisation concerned and its nominee.

Official Portrait of Prime Minister (Question No. 4647)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 18 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) What will be the cost of his official portrait.
  2. Has he often called for economic restraint; if so, as a gesture to that sentiment, will he consider the offer, made by the Opposition in June 1979, of an official portrait commissioned by the Opposition and offered free of charge.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. and (2) As indicated in the answer to Question No. 1649 (Senate Hansard, 21 August 1979, page 72), the Commonwealth has entered into a standard contract for this commission. The following fees were paid for portraits of other parliamentarians and distinguished Australians which have been commissioned or acquired by the Historic Memorials Committee since 1973:

Concessional Air Travel (Question No. 4649)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 8 September 1 979:

  1. How many persons (a) applied for and (b) received special consideration by his Depanment in respect of interstate or overseas air travel (i) in the national interest, or for (ii) sporting, (iii) professional, (iv) business or (v) humanitarian purposes in each of the last 5 years.
  2. Has the introduction of lower seasonal air fares and the resultant maximum use of seating capacity caused a reduction in the number of seats available to the Government for allocation to persons applying to him for concessional rates or other special consideration for ( a ) sporting, ( b ) professional, (c) business or (d ) humanitarian reasons.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1) (a) and (b) Interstate travel: My Department has no power to control concessional travel on interstate services provided by domestic airlines.

    1. (a) and (b) Overseas travel: In common with most other countries Australia requires that proposals for international air travel at less than the approved tariffs or at variance with approved conditions should receive the prior agreement of the aeronautical regulatory authority.

Numerous requests are received each year for special consideration in relation to persons intending to purchase tickets for international air travel. The criteria used in considering requests are ‘significant national interest’ and ‘compelling humanitarian’.

The relevant Air Navigation Regulation (ANR 106A) was amended in 1976. The following table therefore indicates the numbers of people involved in proposals and approvals for 1977, 1978 and the first ten months of 1979.

Notes on the above Table-

  1. With regard to the national interest criterion it is not possible to precisely define requests into those categories specified in the question. The majority of approvals for concessional travel in this category have been for people travelling for the purpose of promoting tourism and international airline travel. During 1979 other approvals have been for persons travelling for aviation security or operational reasons.
  2. The total number of persons for whom concessional travel has been sought is significantly understated because a number of requests which did not receive approval have been for unspecified numbers of people. These figures have therefore been rounded.

  3. In addition to the above figures an arrangement exists between the civil aviation authorities of Australia and the United States for the carriage of up to 200 persons each way between the United States and Australia each year at concessional rates for the purposes of promoting tourism in each country. One hundred and twenty-one persons have travelled under this arrangement during the first ten months of 1979.

    1. Each proposal for international concessional travel is considered on a case by case basis. Greater utilisation of capacity on international airlines following the introduction of new low fares has influenced some decisions. However a more important consideration has been that the new fares have brought international travel within the reach of a wider spectrum of the community on a non-discriminatory basis.

Work Force (Question No. 4652)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 18 September 1979:

  1. What is his Department’s estimate of the number of persons who have left the work force (those who are neither working nor registered for unemployment benefits) as at 1 September 1979.

    1. What has been the increase in the number of (a) registered unemployed, (b) employed and (c) unregistered unemployed, since June 1976.
    2. What is the estimated increase in the work force in 1979-80.
    3. What is the budget estimate for registered unemployed during 1979-80.
    4. Can it be concluded that the difference between the answers to parts (3) and (4) will reveal the number of persons who will leave the work force during 1 979-80.
Mr Viner:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) This question appears to refer to the concept of ‘discouraged job-seekers’ which has been the subject of a number of special surveys carried out by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). According to the results of the latest ABS survey of this type conducted in March 1 979, there were an estimated 63,400 ‘discouraged job-seekers’ in Australia as at that date.

  2. (a) Between May 1976 and September 1979 the number of persons looking for full-time work as measured by the ABS labour force survey increased by 109,200.

    1. The ABS labour force survey showed that the employed labour force increased by 135,800 between May 1976 and September 1979 (the nearest relevant dates for which data are available).
    2. According to the ABS, the number of unemployed persons who indicated that they were not registered with the CES increased between May 1976 and July 1979 (the nearest relevant dates for which data are available ) by 1 9,900.
  3. No specific forecast of the estimated size of the labour force for 1 979-80 is available.
  4. No specific forecast of registered unemployed during 1979-80 is provided in the Budget.
  5. No.

Indo-Chinese Immigrants (Question No. 4653)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 18 September 1979:

  1. What assistance is made available to Vietnamese immigrants.
  2. Has he recevied special representations from the United States or Thai Governments or any other source regarding immigration of those persons known as the hill people from Laos, recruited by the US CIA during the Indochina conflict.
Mr MacKellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The intake of refugees to Australia is a part of the total immigration program and the Government accepts that, where possible, programs for the settlement of refugees should be provided within the context of those for migrants generally. It should be noted that refugees from Laos and Kampuchea are being resettled in Australia under this program as well as Vietnamese.

The Commonwealth Government provides a framework, in terms of programs and services, to meet immediate postarrival needs. This is carried out through the provision of hostel accommodation, the payment of social security benefits, and English language tuition and other orientation. There is a scheme whereby the Commonwealth Government reimburses voluntary agencies for providing needed clothing and other personal requisites to newly-arrived refugees.

The Commonwealth Government provides an accommodation advisory service at migrant centres and centre-based officers of the Commonwealth Employment Service provide assistance with job placements.

  1. No formal representations have been received from the United States or Thai Governments. Representations have been received from the Hmong- Australia Cultural Society regarding the resettlement in Australia of Hmong refugees in Thailand. 92 Octane Fuel (Question No. 4657)
Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 1 8 September 1979:

What are the cost and conservation benefits of 92 octane fuel, presently marketed by Caltex in New South Wales only.

Mr Newman:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I understand that 92 octane motor spirit accounted for abour 1 7 per cent of Caltex sales in New South Wales in the month of October 1979. The costs and benefits of using a 92 octane motor spirit were discussed in the National Energy Advisory Committee’s Report ‘Motor Spirit- Octane Ratings and Lead Additives ‘of February 1978.

Uranium Advisory Council (Question No. 4685)

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 19 September 1979:

Has the Uranium Advisory Council inspected all environmental reports and recommendations made by government and semi-government officials and authorities at every stage of uranium mining operations at Rum Jungle; if so, what recommendations has the Council made to ensure that there will be no repetition of the environmental damage which has occurred at any other site at which uranium mining proceeds; if not, will he refer the matter to the Council for a report.

Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to the reference to the former mining operations at Rum Jungle on page 6 of the first report of the Uranium Advisory Council which I tabled in Parliament on 1 3 September 1979 (Daily Hansard, pages 1085-87). I also refer the honourable member to the Ministerial statement on uranium development I made on 25 August 1977. In that statement I made it clear that there will be no more projects like Rum Jungle. The operations at Rum Jungle reflected environmental attitudes of 25 years ago which Australians would not tolerate today.

The Government’s policy in respect of uranium development takes fully into account the need for environmental protection. Development approval for particular projects will only be given following, amongst other things, completion of the necessary environmental requirements. As indicated in my statement of 13 September 1979 on the tabling of the first report of the Uranium Advisory Council, the Government does seek the views of the Council on the development of individual uranium projects. I have referred to the Council Pancontinental Mining Limited ‘s final environmental impact statement on the Jabiluka project together with the comments, suggestions and recommendations provided by the Minister for Science and the Environment under the Environment Protection Administrative Procedures of the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974. lt is my intention to do the same in respect of Noranda Australia Limited ‘s Koongarra project and of other proposals for uranium development.

Dyeing Agents (Question No. 4691)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) Are there any laws which govern the mandatory labelling, in English, of imported products such as dyeing agents.
  2. Is it a fact that every colour dye licensed for use in Australia has to have a code index number.

Are some imported dyes being sold in Adelaide without the appropriate code number; if so, what action does he propose to take on this matter.

Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Imported products such as dyeing agents are subject to the requirements of the Customs Act 1901 and the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act 1905. If dyeing agents are imported in a pre-packed form the package must therefore bear, in the English language, a true description of the goods, the quantity or weight and the country of origin.
  2. and (3) I am advised that there is no requirement under Commonwealth legislation for every colour dye used in Australia to have a code index number.

There is a registration system for dye colours used in certain countries known as the ‘Colour Index Number’ but again there is no requirement under Commonwealth legislation for dye manufacturers to register their products under this system.

I am also advised that dyestuffs used in certain industries may be subject to State and Territory legislation governing the labelling of goods in those States and Territories.

Post-graduate Awards (Question No. 4697)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 20 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) Are the vast majority of post-graduate students at Australian universities forced to undertake work as demonstrators or tutors because they cannot exist on the salary of $4,200 per annum.
  2. Do these students pay 43.5 cents in the dollar PAYE taxation on their earnings, even though the conditions of post-graduate awards allow for a maximum of only 180 hours extra employment.
  3. Are research scholars in effect obliged to make an interest-free loan of 43.5 cents in the dollar to the Treasury for all additional earnings.
  4. Is it fact that these scholars are worse off in money terms in 1 979 than they were in 1 977.
  5. If so, will he raise the post-graduate allowance and correct the taxation anomaly which penalises post-graduate students.
Mr Howard:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) I am advised that information is not available on the extent to which Postgraduate Award holders currently undertake work as demonstrators or tutors. A proportion of Award holders have traditionally undertaken this kind of work, both as a means of supplementing Award allowances and for the teaching experience it provides. >
  2. Presumably the honourable member here intended to refer to PAYE taxation deductions of 33.5 cents in the dollar and not 43.5 cents. The former is the current rate on a taxable income in excess of $3,893 but not exceeding $ 16,608.

To avoid their being faced with a large tax bill at the end of a financial year, taxpayers who derive income from more than one source have their income from all but the major source taxed at the standard rate of taxation. As announced, the standard rate will revert to 32 cents in the dollar for PAYE purposes from 1 December 1979.

The standard rate is applied in these circumstances because ordinarily, anyone who has a second source of income would, in the aggregate, be receiving income sufficient to attract that rate. The application of the tax instalment deduction arrangements usually has the result that the total of the tax instalments deducted from the income of a person with two sources of income is approximately equal to the amount of tax that would have been deducted if those earnings had been from the one source.

There are exceptions to this and the Commissioner of Taxation may, if requested, arrange for lower instalments that those prescribed (or even no instalments at all) to be deducted if the circumstances so warrant.

  1. The implication here seems to be that postgraduate students undertaking additional work would, automatically as it were, receive a refund of the tax instalments deducted from their earnings because their income would be insufficient to attract tax or, if they were liable for taxation, that the instalments deducted would exceed the amount of tax payable.

While it is clearly not possible for tax instalment schedules for general use to match the tax payable in every case, the schedules meet the requirements of the great majority of taxpayers.

Where a taxpayer considers that instalments deducted in accordance with the schedules would be excessive, he or she may apply to have them varied. A person who wishes to do this should contact the nearest Taxation Office giving details of estimated income, allowable deductions, dependants and concessional expenditure for the year. Advice will then be given regarding the tax instalments appropriate in the particular circumstances and, if necessary, arrangements made to have instalments deducted at a lower rate or discontinued altogether.

  1. No. In money terms, Commonwealth Postgraduate Award Allowances are higher in 1979 than in 1977. In 1977 the allowance for an Award holder without dependants was $4,000; in 1979 it is $4,200. An Award holder with a dependant spouse received an additional $1,508 a year in 1977; this allowance has risen to $ 1,632.80 in 1979.
  2. Postgraduate Award Allowances will remain at the same level for 1 980 but will be reviewed again prior to 1 98 1 . As for the alleged anomaly, see the answers to parts (2) and (3).

Energy Policy (Question No. 4699)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 20 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) Did he state in April 1979 that the Government would shortly be presenting an energy policy discussion paper which would canvass future energy needs and options; if so, why has it not been presented.
  2. Why did he reject my proposal in a question on notice, that there is an urgent need to set up a Joint Standing Committee of the Parliament to inquire into and report upon Australia’s fuel and energy needs as in the Parliaments of (a) the United States of America, (b) the United Kingdom and (c) the European Economic Community.
  3. On what grounds does he deny members of all parties and both Houses the opportunity to contribute to an energy policy for this country.
  4. Why is inquiry confined to the Senate Committee on Trade and Resources.
  5. Will he reconsider my proposal.
Mr Newman:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Although an energy policy discussion paper was being prepared, the statement on Government energy policy initiatives made by the Prime Minister on 27 June overtook plans for the completion of such a document.

The Department of National Development has published a paper, ‘Australian Energy Policy- A Review’ which was released on 15 October. As I indicated in my foreword, the paper is designed to canvass possible future energy perspectives, clarify policy issues, and provide an account of the very significant developments which have occurred in energy policy in Australia over the last year or two.

  1. , (3), (4) and (5) See my answer to Question No. 1690 in the Hansard for 1 1 September 1 979, page 974.

Petrol Supplies to Southern Cross Petroleum (Question No. 4701)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 20 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) Did Golden Fleece Petroleum and other oil companies threaten to cease petrol supplies to Southern Cross Petroleum (a group of 37 petrol resellers in South Australia) in July 1979.
  2. Are the marketing reform measures which he promised to introduce last February applicable to this situation; if not, why not.
Mr Fife:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. I have been informed that in June 1979, Golden Fleece Petroleum advised that it would cease petrol supplies to Southern Cross and that another supplier advised that it would have to reduce supplies. I have also been informed that Golden Fleece stated that its reason for discontinuing supply was that it did not have sufficient product to supply Southern Cross, to whom it had no contractual commitments, as well as customers to whom it did have contractual commitments.
  2. I assume that the honourable member is referring to the package of proposals which I announced on 30 October 1978. On 23 October 1979I announced that the Government had decided to have draft legislation prepared, for public comment, dealing with franchising in the petroleum retail marketing industry. The proposed franchise legislation would not apply to Southern Cross since it is not in a franchise relationship with its suppliers. A decision on the price discrimination and divorcement provisions of the original package of proposals has been deferred. In any case these measures were not intended to apply to independent resellers, so that they would continue to have freedom to negotiate with suppliers for supply on the best terms available from time to time and thereby preserve the beneficial effects on competition provided by independent resellers.

States Grants (Home Care) Act (Question No. 4703)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 20 September 1979:

  1. When was the States Grants (Home Care) Act amended to change the funding basis for approved housekeeping or other domestic activities and for the salary of welfare officers employed in conjunction with a senior citizens’ centre from a $2:$ 1 to a $ 1 : $ 1 basis with the States.
  2. What has been the estimated saving to the Government since that date.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

– The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. The States Grants (Home Care) Act amendment of 1978 received Royal Assent on 22 September 1978.
  2. The particular nature of the program makes it difficult- and perhaps even irrelevant- to try to estimate savings’ consequent upon the changed funding basis. Because the Commonwealth reimburses the States for approved expenditures under the program, any notional savings in 1978-79 and 1979-80 would be dependent upon State estimates of what their expenditure would have been on the former $2:$1 funding basis. Such estimates are not available.

The honourable member will, no doubt, be interested in the following information concerning expenditures under the program: expenditure for 1 979-80 is estimated to be $ 10,372,000; an increase of $964,3 10 over expenditure in 1 978-79.

Total State and Commonwealth expenditure has risen from $14,788,758 in 1977-78 to an estimated total of $20,744,000 in 1979-80, partly due to an expansion in expenditure on existing services, but additionally from the approval of 25 new home care services and 79 additional welfare officer positions.

Means Test on Service Pension Increases (Question No. 4707)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, upon notice, on 20 September 1 979:

  1. 1 ) When was the service pension paid to eligible veterans aged 70 years and over frozen with future increases in the form of an income-tested supplement.
  2. What has been the estimated saving to the Government since that date.
Mr Adermann:
Minister Assisting the Minister for Primary Industry · FISHER, QUEENSLAND · NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The pension was frozen with effect from 2 November 1978.
  2. The information requested by the honourable member is not readily available, for the period November 1978 to October 1 979, and its compilation would be a very expensive and time consuming exercise. The honourable member may be interested in the estimates that, from November 1979, there will be a saving to the Government of $3.2m for the remainder of the year 1979-80 and $4.6m in the full year 1980-81.

The estimated savings do not take into account any increases in pension rates which may take place in May 1980 or in the financial year 1 980-8 1.

Aluminium Smelters, Hunter Valley (Question No. 5175)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Science and the Environment, upon notice, on 22 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Can the Minister state what Federal and State government environmental impact assessments have been or will be carried out on proposed new aluminium smelters in the Hunter Valley, NSW.
  2. Have any assessments examined the likely impact of fluoride emissions on grapes grown in the area for the Hunter Valley wine industry.
Mr Groom:
LP

– The Minister for Science and the Environment has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) The proposed establishment and operation of an aluminium smelter by Aluminium Pechiney Australia Pty Ltd, is being examined in accordance with the Administrative Procedures under the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act. Other smelter proposals in the Hunter Valley have not yet been formally referred to my Department for action under the Environment Protection Administrative

Procedures. I expect that any environmental assessment carried out of these proposals would be in co-operation with the New South Wales State environmental authorities.

  1. Any assessment of proposed smelters in the Hunter Valley of New South Wales under the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act will examine all emissions and their possible effects on the surrounding vegetation and communities.

Immigration (Question No. 4433)

Dr Blewett:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 22 August 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many persons have applied for immigration to Australia since 1 January 1979.
  2. How many persons have been accepted for immigration since 1 January 1979.
  3. How many persons were approved in the categories, (a) immediate family reunion, (b) special family reunion, (c) nances, (d) independent applicants, (e) employment nominees, (f) refugees, (g) patrials, (h) entrepreneurs, (i) self-supporting retirees, and (j) others.
Mr Mackellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows (figures refer to the period 1 January 1979 to 31 July 1979):

  1. 1 ) The number of people included in formal applications received by overseas posts was approximately 94,500. This does not include those who enquired about migration but did not proceed to application stage.
  2. The number of people approved by normal process overseas for permanent residence was approximately 23,900.
  3. The numbers of visas issued in each category were: (a) 5,553, (b) 3,489, (c) 643, (d) 9,372, (e) 1,678, (0 1,450, (g) 82,(h)241,(i)8l,(j)347.

The visas would have been issued on the basis of the different policies applying before and after 1 January 1979, depending on the date of lodgment of the application.

Note: The statistics in ( 1 ), (2 ) and ( 3 ) are preliminary and exclude numbers under the respective categories for some posts which had not reported for parts of the period. They

also exclude data on Indo-Chinese refugees processed by the Task Forces in Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand. The number of arrivals of such persons in the period 1 January 1979 to 31 July 1979 was approximately 6,600.

The statistics also exclude data on New Zealand citizens and on residents of New Zealand who are British Commonwealth citizens or citizens of the Republic of Ireland entering Australia under the Trans-Tasman Agreement, without the need to obtain visas or entry permits. The number of arrivals of such persons in the period 1 January 1979 to 31 July 1979 was approximately 8,900. It should be noted that some approvals in the period were of persons who lodged applications before I January 1979. Similarly, a considerable proportion of applications lodged in the period have yet to be determined.

The figures given in 3 (a) and 3 (b) relate to the number of visas issued under the immediate and special family reunion categories in the period 1 January 1979 to 31 July 1979. However, a proportion of the persons who were issued visas under other eligibility categories, such as general eligibility (independent applicants), had family links in Australia. Statistics on the extent of this connection are not available, but this aspect needs to be borne in mind when considering the family reunion element of the migration intake.

Public Rental Housing (Question No. 4552)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 30 August 1979:

In respect of each public housing authority in each State and Territory, and for each month from June 1976 to June 1979, (a) how many tenants were accommodated, (b) how many tenants were in arrears in their rent payments, (c) what was the (i) total and (ii) average amount of rent outstanding, (d) what was the average number of weeks in arrears, (e) how many notices to quit were given to tenants and (0 how many tenants were evicted.

Mr Groom:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

The detailed information sought was not readily available in my Department. As providing an answer strictly as asked would have involved considerable effort on the part of public housing authorities of the States and Territories, it has been prepared on the basis of financial years instead of months as follows:

Radiation Effects: Mr Solomon Nayilibity (Question No. 4604)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Science and the Environment, upon notice, on 12 September 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to a report in the Northern Territory News of 4 September 1979, claiming that ( a ) Mr Solomon Nayilibity, employed for some years by Queensland Mines as an Aboriginal Liaison Officer, lived with his family for about 6 months in a core shed belonging to the company, (b) the shed and a nearby tank containing radioactive samples were marked as radioactive, (c) the company has claimed that (i) unmineralised dust samples only were in the shed and were not dangerous and (ii) Mr Nayilibity did not mention any fears of radiation to a company spokesman who saw him during August 1979, (d) the company has not replied to Mr Nayilibity ‘s request for a medical test, (e) the test would be unlikely to disclose irradiation effects which might take decades to appear, (f) uranium samples were spilt from a split bag over a former company exploration camp site and registered more than the maximum 5000 microrems/hour on a counter, 85 times the safe public exposure limit and (g) Aborigines hunt and camp in the area but the company has no commission to re-enter the area.
  2. Does the Depanment of Science and the Environment override the Depanment of Health in monitoring safety.
  3. What steps have been taken by uranium rnining companies to increase safety and correct bad housekeeping practices.
Mr Groom:
LP

-The Minister for Science and the Environment has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question: (1)1 have seen the report in the Northern Territory News to which the honourable member refers. It concerns allegations relating to two situations arising out of past activities of Queensland Mines Limited in the Nabarlek area which could have led to radiation exposure of Aboriginal people. The allegations were made by a field officer of the Northern Land Council to the Manager of the Jabiru Laboratory of the Office of the Supervising Scientist. The Supervising Scientist passed these allegations to the appropriate Northern Territory Supervising Authorities, the Departments of Mines and Energy and of Health, for investigation.

The first allegation was that Mr Solomon Nayilibitj, a local Aboriginal who is an employee of Queensland Mines, and his family and other Aboriginals had some years ago lived for approximately 6 months in a core shed containing uranium bearing core samples. Mr Nayilibitj was alleged to be worried about possible radiation effects and to have requested Queensland Mines Limited to carry out medical checks.

The second allegation was that radioactive ore samples were scattered about an old Queensland Mines Limited exploration camp site, some 9 kilometres from the present Nabarlek lease, an area in the vicinity of which Aboriginals hunt

I am advised by the Supervising Scientist, on the basis of information supplied by the Northern Territory authorities and Queensland Mines Limited, as follows.

Some three or four years ago when the Queensland Mines Limited site was on a care and maintenance basis, local Aboriginal people camped for a few months about an old drillers galvanised iron shed near the Nabarlek ore body. In the shed were a number of plastic bags containing smaller calico bags of percussion drill hole cuttings. Some of this bagged material contained uranium ore.

It is understood that the Aboriginals did not spend much time in the shed but lived and slept outside under the verandah 2 to 3 metres from the bags. I am informed that the camp was probably occupied for no longer than 6 months. The Aboriginals were asked to leave by a Mines Depanment inspector in June 1976 and the company subsequently removed the shed and buried the cuttings nearby.

Queensland Mines Limited have no details of the discarded drill cuttings nor of the uranium content of the samples. However, the buried samples were located and a radiometric survey was carried out by Queensland Mines Limited and the Northern Territory Depanment of Mines and Energy in the presence of representatives of the Office of the Supervising Scientist on 21 September 1979. The average radiation exposure rate at about 1 metre from the uncovered samples was three to four times that due to local background radiation (0. 1 millirem per hour compared with a background rate of 0.03 to .04 millirem per hour in the vicinity).

All the material has now been removed and will be disposed of in the pit with other waste.

It is not possible to calculate the radiation exposure that may have been received by the Aboriginals without knowing the radiation field around the cuttings in the shed and the time spent in their vicinity. The exposure rate where the Aboriginals would have spent most of their time would have been much less than the 0. 1 millirem per hour measured at 1 metre from the specimens and it is unlikely that exposures much above background would have been experienced. Clearly any accumulated exposure would have been less than the annual dose limit of 500 millirem per year laid down in the Australian Code of Practice on Radiation Protection in the Mining and Milling of Radioactive Ores for members of the public living in the vicinity of uranium mines.

A medical examination would not reveal effects of radiation at these exposures. I am informed that Queensland Mines Limited are not aware that Mr Nayilibitj has expressed concern about radiation exposure, nor that he has ever requested a medical examination. He has never been denied one by Queensland Mines Limited, and on 20 September 1 979, Mr Nayilibitj chose not to accept a Queensland Mines Limited offer of a medical examination. I am also informed that Queensland Mines Limited is prepared to arrange, upon request, for medicals for Mr Nayilibitj, his family or any other member of the Nabarlek Aboriginal community who is concerned about radiation and at no cost to the Aboriginals.

The second allegation was investigated by the Northern Territory Depanment of Mines, Queensland Mines Limited and staff of the Office of the Supervising Scientist together with representatives of the NLC and the local Aboriginals. The location of the radioactive samples was the original Queensland Mines Limited exploration camp site some 9 kilometres south-east of Nabarlek, and outside the present Queensland Mines Limited mining lease. This camp was abandoned late in 1970. Queensland Mines Limited has not been permitted access to this locality since 1973 when exploration in the area ceased.

The investigation revealed two sources of radiation at the site giving exposure rates above background. One source was about 80 bags of mildly radioactive powdered drill samples located in a small cave close to the old camp. The other was a number of uranium ore specimens found on the ground in two spots within the camp area. General radiation exposure rates within the cave, about 1 metre from the piles of bags, were 0.1 millirem per hour (three to four times local background). Dose rates on the surface of individual bags, some of which had broken open, ranged between 0.0S and 0.2 millirem per hour with a maximum of 1 millirem per hour.

The ore samples were apparently hand specimens of Nabarlek ore. There were 9 rocks in all weighing one or two kilograms each with surface dose rates ranging between 10 and 60 millirem per hour. Dose rates at 1 metre were 1 to 2 millirem per hour. Prolonged handling of such rocks or living close by them for long periods could lead to unacceptably high radiation exposures and the possible manifestation of medical effects.

The state of the bagged samples and the rock specimens indicated that they had been undisturbed for some years. The camp site could have been visited by the odd hunting party during the dry season but is inaccessible during the wet. The general area shows no signs of recent habitation. It thus appears unlikely that anyone has received excessive doses of radiation.

All bags and rock specimens and any residual contamination were removed by Queensland Mines Limited in the presence of officers of the Department of Mines and Energy and a representative of the Supervising Scientist. Radiometric surveys have indicated that with the exception of one small patch ( 1 metre x 4 metres) radiation levels in the area now approximate normal background.

An inspection and survey of the area on 20 September 1979 by Northern Territory Department of Mines and Energy officers accompanied by representatives of the Supervising Scientist and Queensland Mines Limited, Mr Solomon Nayilibitj and Mr Frank Nalowed, another traditional owner, confirmed that the radioactive material had been removed.

  1. ) Radiological health matters related to uranium mining in the Northern Teritory arc subject to the provisions of the Mines (Radiation Protection) Regulations 1978, which are jointly administered by the Director of Mines and the Chief Medical Officer of the Northern Territory. These regulations effectively enact the Australian Code of Practice on Radiation Protection in the Mining and Milling of Radioactive Ores published by the Australian Department of Health in 1975.
  2. All uranium mining operations in the Alligator Rivers Region are now subject to a large body of applicable laws and agreements relating to control of environmental and public health impact. The law is administered largely by Supervising Authorities of the Northern Territory with the Supervising Scientist for the Alligator Rivers Region exercising a co-ordinating and supervising role.

The legislation, agreements and administrative arrangements that have been established by the Commonwealth and the Northern Territory Governments are described in some detail in the first Annual Report 1978-79 of the Supervising Scientist which was tabled in this House on 15 November 1979.

Commonwealth Medical Benefits (Question No. 4706)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 20 September 1979:

What was the (a) number of and (b) total sum paid on (i) claims involving 75 per cent of medical expenses for disadvantaged persons and (ii) claims involving 85 per cent of medical expenses for eligible pensioners since 1 November 1978.

Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Statistics available from the direct billing payment system operated by my Department and quarterly returns from registered organisations for dic period 1 November 1978 to 31 March 1979 show:

Overseas Students (Question No. 4723)

Dr Cass:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 25 September 1979:

  1. How many overseas students have been attending Australian educational institutions during each of the last 5 years under (a) bilateral aid agreements and (b) as private students.
  2. ) What was the country of origin of each student.
  3. 3 ) Ho w many from each country completed their studies.
  4. How many ex-students from each country (a) applied for permanent residence visas and (b) were granted permanent residence visas.
  5. How many ex-students from each country returned home ( a) immediately after completing courses and ( b) after 2 or 3 years of work experience.
  6. What conditions, financial or otherwise (such as the relevance of courses chosen to needs of country of origin ) are imposed on private study students before permission is granted to study in Australia.
Mr MacKellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. The numbers of overseas students attending Australian educational institutions during each of the last five years (a) under bilateral arrangements and (b) as private students were:
  1. The breakdown of the students in (1 ) into country of last residence as at 30 June 1979, and over the last5 years is set out in table ‘A’.
  2. Total figures for years ended 30 June are:1979-not yet available, 1978-1,656, 1977-1,832, 1976-1,906, 1975-990.

Statistics giving country of origin of these are not available.

  1. The numbers of overseas students and trainees who (a) applied for and (b) were granted resident status since 1 974-75 are set out in attached table ‘ B’.
  2. Table ‘C shows the numbers of persons who while still holding student status, departed permanently each year. Figures are not available to show the period spent in Australia between completion of the course of study and return home.
  3. The conditions of private student entry for post secondary formal studies applying before 22 August, 1979, were: the proposed course of study or its equivalent not being available in the home country or country of residence; such study being of worthwhile content and duration leading to a qualification which would be recognised or be of value in relation to future employment opportunities in the home country or country of residence; the student having the capacity (including a satisfactory knowledge of English) to undertake the proposed course of study; the student gaining enrolment in an Australian educational institution to undertake the approved course of study; a financial guarantor being available who agreed to meet the costs of the student’s fares to and from Australia, fees and maintenance; the student having a genuine intention to enter Australia on a temporary basis for study purposes only and giving an undertaking to depart from Australia on the completion of the approved course of study or if studies were abandoned; a passport or travel authority being held valid for reentry into the home country or country of residence; and health and character requirements being met.

Persons Living in Caravans (Question No. 4735)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 26 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) Further to his answer to Question No. 3938 (Hansard, 7 June 1979, page 3159), how many children in (a) primary and (b) secondary school age groups were resident in private mobile dwellings or caravans in each State or Territory at the time of the 1976 Census.
  2. What steps is he taking to ensure that comprehensive and recent data will become readily available on the number of persons living permanently in caravans in Australia.
Mr Groom:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Information collected in the 1976 Census on the number of people residing in caravans on the night of the Census is classified into two groups:

    1. persons occupying private mobile dwellings. These are defined as mobile dwellings (including caravans) standing on their own block of land and not occupied by members of the same household resident in an adjacent dwelling.
    2. persons occupying a caravan in a caravan park, on either a permanent or temporary basis.

The age distribution of people resident in private mobile dwellings or caravans in each State or Territory at the time of the 1 976 Census is as follows:

  1. A request has been made to the Australian Bureau of Statistics for 1976 Census data on the number of persons residing in caravans situated in caravan parks on the night of the Census. The information will make a distinction between permanent and temporary residents. It will be provided to the honourable member as soon as it becomes available.

Economic Impact of Budgets (Question No. 4736)

Mr Willis:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 26 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) Does his Depanment use any measures for evaluating the stance of fiscal policy and /or the overall economic impact of the budget; if so, what are they and how are they calculated.
  2. What do these measures indicate concerning the economic impact of budgets from 1969-70 to and including the estimated impact of the 1979-80 Budget.
Mr Howard:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) It is not the custom of the Treasury to employ exclusively any single index of the stance of fiscal policy or the overall economic impact of the budget. The complexity of the interaction between the budget and the economy necessarily renders inadequate any individual summary measure of the stance of the budget.
  2. I refer the honourable member to the discussion in Parts II and III of Statement No. 2 and the historical estimates provided in Statement No. 6 of this year’s Budget papers for discussion relevant to the subject of his question. As is clear in those statements, the economic impact of the Budget sector should be assessed in the perspective of the overall impact of total public sector transactions of which the Budget sector is but one part.

Telecom Australia: Planning (Question No. 4738)

Mr Willis:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 26 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) What steps have been taken to implement Telecom’s approval of the recommendations in Telecom 2000 relating to open planning since publication of the Outcomes from that report.
  2. Will a users council be established.
  3. What forms of industrial democracy have been introduced.
  4. What organisational changes have been made to facilitate greater decentralisation.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Telecom Australia, as a matter of corporate policy, supports an open planning strategy that is manageable within available resources. In reviewing its Corporate Plan, Telecom has adopted an open planning approach; consultations are being arranged with a number of appropriate representative bodies (e.g. major unions and telecommunications users groups). Telecom recently conducted a seminar on Social Research and Telecommunications Planning, which involved Telecom managers in discussion with academics and consultants, active in several fields of socioeconomic research throughout Australia. A seminar on Public Policy-Making and Telecommunications Planning is scheduled for 1980.
  2. A users council has not been established as a single entity. Rather, Telecom has fostered the development of several telecommunications users groups. These include: the Major Private Line Lessees Croup; the Data Communications Users Group; the Australian Bankers Automation Committee; the Australian Council for Rehabilitation of the Disabled; the Commonwealth Press Union.

In addition, Telecom has an extensive market research program. This program includes customer impact studies, especially in the non-business sector.

  1. Forms of representative industrial democracy that currently exist in Telecom include:

Telecom Consultative Council, which meets twice a year and consists of senior Telecom management and officials of major unions; consultative arrangements with individual unions for a wide range of activities have been developed.

In a broad sense, Telecom recognises the need for ongoing consultation with staff associations on matters that are likely to affect staff. Of particular relevance is the introduction of new technology. In this regard, a special subcommittee of the aforementioned Telecom Consultative Council has prepared a document which specifies procedures for the introduction of new technology. This document has been accepted by Telecom Consultative Council and is now awaiting ratification by some staff associations.

  1. Telecom has decentralised its field operations through the introduction of a District form of organisation. Seventysix full District Telecommunications Offices have been established throughout Australia and seven outposts have been created.

House Prices in Sydney (Question No. 4739)

Mr Willis:

asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 26 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) What was the average increase in price for an average 3 bedroom house in Sydney during 1978-79.
  2. Why have house prices in Sydney risen sharply during the year.
  3. Does the price increase suggest an imbalance between supply and demand for housing.
  4. Is there any evidence of a housing shortage in Sydney as at 25 September 1979.
Mr Groom:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) No information is available on the overall average increase in 1978-79 for the Sydney metropolitan area in prices of ‘ an average three bedroom house ‘. However, one set of information on prices is contained in a report by the New South Wales Valuer-General’s Department This contains valuers’ conclusions on the market (as distinct from actual sale prices) for ‘average 3-bedroom cottages’ in a selection of suburbs. Of the 33 Sydney suburbs surveyed, price increases ranged between 6 per cent and 35 per cent between June 1978 and June 1979; increases exceeded 25 percent for only two suburbs.

In several of the outer suburbs surveyed, which are representative of the areas where many first-home buyers acquire houses, increases in prices were considerably lower.

Analysis of Home Savings Grant approvals data indicates that the average price of dwellings purchased by first home buyers in Sydney increased by 12.3 per cent between 1977-78 and 1978-79.

Although the Valuer-General’s data cover both new and previously occupied cottages, it is likely that in most of the suburbs surveyed few, if any, of the prices covered would relate to new houses. Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics indicate that in the twelve months to September 1979, new house prices in Sydney rose by 7.9 per cent, compared to the overall increase in the CPI for Sydney of 10.0 per cent

  1. As is evident from ( I ), sharp price increases have only been recorded in a few established suburbs of Sydney suburbs where the stock of houses is fixed suburbs which are in demand because of their location close to the central business district and/or their good access to public transport.

Other factors which may have affected house prices in Sydney would include: an element of ‘catching up’ following several years of relatively modest increases in prices a marked reduction in completions of flats and home units from 1974 onwards, especially in established suburbs, due in large part to local government restrictions.

In most other capital cities, the average prices of land and dwellings remained relatively stable in 1978-79. The comparatively rapid increases in values of houses and land indicated” for many suburbs of Sydney, appear to reflect characteristics peculiar to the Sydney market.

  1. The increases in dwelling prices in 1978-79 reflect a strengthening of demand for housing in Sydney and shifts in the locational preferences of homebuyers. The price increases may be understood as pan of the clearing process in the housing market.

Pan of the overall increase in prices may have been due to a small degree of ‘underbuilding’ in the mid- 1970 ‘s, relative to the trend of underlying demand for housing. The recent strong improvement in new dwelling construction in Sydney indicates that this situation is being rectified by the market.

  1. No. While the information required to make a detailed assessment is not available, a general assessment is that there is no overall housing shortage. This is not to say that particular shortages do not exist relative to demand in some suburbs, or that particular groups are not facing some difficulty in finding suitable housing.

Government Appointments (Question No. 4759)

Mr James:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 26 September 1 979:

  1. 1 ) What Liberal and National Country Party (a) Ministers or ex-Ministers (b) Members or ex-Members, (c) Senators or ex-Senators and (d) prominent officials or exofficials, have been appointed by the Commonwealth Government to (i) judicial positions (ii) diplomatic or trade posts, (iti) remunerative positions on statutory authorities or (iv) any other office of profit under the Crown since December 1975.
  2. What was the (a) date of appointment, (b) term of appointment and (c) salary on appointment in each case.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Lists are not kept which would precisely answer the question asked by the honourable member but appointments to the positions indicated in his question are usually announced publicly at the time they are made. Appointments to judicial positions, diplomatic and trade posts and membership of statutory authorities are listed in the Commonwealth Directory.

To compile lists in the form requested by the honourable member would constitute an additional call on resources at a time when staff resources in Departments are limited.

Telecom Manual Assistance Centres (Question No. 4777)

Mr Wallis:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 27 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) In what country centres of

    1. South Australia; and
    2. the Electoral Division of Grey, do Telecom manual assistance centres operate.
  2. Is Telecom proposing to close a number of these centres; if so, which are to be closed.
  3. 3 ) Has consideration been given by Telecom to the disadvantages of these closures.

  4. Is it a fact that closure of these centres

    1. will have an effect on female employment; and
    2. b) will be a risk to security in times of emergencies such as bushfires.
  5. If so, could situations that have the back-up of manual assistance centres to maintain communications overcome these effects.
  6. Will he take steps to reverse any Telecom policy in regard to the closure of these centres.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) (a) Berri, Gawler, Kadina, Kingscote, McLaren Vale, Mount Barker, Mount Gambier, Port Augusta, Port Lincoln, Port Pirie and Woomera.

    1. b) Port Augusta, Port Lincoln, Port Pirie and Woomera.

  2. Kingscote will be closed this financial year. Other centres for which closures are under consideration at the approximate times indicated are:

Berri ( 1 98 1 -82, McLaren Vale ( 1 980-8 1 , Mount Barker (1980-81), Port Augusta (1982-83), Port Lincoln ( 1 980-8 1 ) and Woomera ( 1 98 1 -82 ).

Telecom plans to establish a new manual assistance centre at M Murray Bridge in 1 980-8 1 .

  1. to (6) All aspects of the proposed closures including the question of security during emergencies and the effect on local employment have been considered carefully, and Telecom does not propose to depart from its long standing policy of progressive conversion of manual exchanges to automatic working, resulting in a gradual decline in the level of manual assistance. Fortunately, the application of modern computerised technology to manual assistance systems allows more flexibility in the location of operators’ positions without economic penalty, enabling employment opportunities to be decentralised to a much greater extent than previously planned. Prior to this new development, of which Telecom is now planning to take full advantage, equipment design and economic pressures had favoured a policy which eventually would have led to the closure of all country manual assistance centres in South Australia. Telecom’s present aim is to try to retain the present country/metropolitan ratio of manual assistance operators.

The increasing use of radio links and underground cable in the trunk and local subscribers’ networks will continue to progressively reduce the possibility of physical disruption from causes such as bushfires. Continuous service will increase as the automatic conversion program proceeds. In any emergency, the availability of secure, continuous telephone communications is an obvious advantage.

Trunking of the network is also arranged in a manner which minimises the impact on service when failures occur. By the widespread use of automatic alternative routing techniques, and the establishment of manual assistance at the most strategic locations, maximum security within the network is achieved.

Staff ceilings in Australia Post and Telecom Australia (Question No. 4782)

Mr Innes:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 9 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is (a) Australia Post or (b) Telecom Australia subject to any (i) ministerial or (ii) Public Service Board direction in the determination of staff ceilings.
  2. What are the reasons for the imposition of staff ceilings in (a) Australia Post and ( b) Telecom Australia.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The Australian Postal Commission and the Australian Telecommunications Commission determine their own manpower plans. Their policies for this purpose are broadly consistent with those pursued by the Government in the public sector. The Minister and the Public Service Board are kept fully informed on the Commissions’ staffing levels and manpower plans.
  2. Not applicable.

Telecom Australia: Equipment Shortages (Question No. 4784)

Mr Innes:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 9 October 1979:

  1. 1) Is the standard of service afforded the general public by Telecom Australia affected or reduced by shortages of equipment.
  2. Are telephone cabinets and cables in short supply.
  3. 3 ) What other equipment is in short supply.
  4. What are the reasons for equipment shortages and what action is Telecom taking to overcome the situation.

  5. What is the average delay in

    1. installation of new telephone services;
    2. reconnection of telephone services;
    3. repair of damaged public telephones; and
    4. replacement of damaged public telephone cabinets.
  6. What are the extreme delays in each of the categories mentioned in part ( 5 ).

  7. Are any of the delay categories in parts (5) and (6) considered unacceptable by

    1. Telecom; and
    2. his Department; if so, what is being done to overcome these situations.
  8. Are staff shortages a reason for delay in any of the categories in parts (5) and (6).
Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) to (4) In general availability of equipment supplies is satisfactory to and shortages are not affecting the overall standard of service.

With such a large range of equipment and cables purchased and used by Telecom, it is inevitable that there will be shortages of some items, from time to time, but these are generally of a limited nature.

The purchasing program is closely monitored and stocks are managed at levels to minimise difficulties, consistent with economic business managements.

  1. ) to (8) The average installation time for 90 per cent of orders issued in the various States range from 12 to 28 working days with most of the remaining 10 per cent not exceeding 40 days. There are a relatively few applications deferred beyond 3 months where a major cable or equipment extension is required.

Reconnections of in-place services are normally effected on the same day or next working day after issue of the order with delays exceeding two days occurring only infrequently.

Public telephone damage is often caused by vandalism but performance objectives for clearance of most faults on subscribers services by the end of the working day following the report are generally being achieved.

Where complete replacement of a damaged public telephone is necessary the damaged cabinet can be removed and the site made safe within 2 to 4 hours of the report. Where a complete replacement unit is necessary usually this can be installed within one month.

For minor repairs to damaged cabinets the objective is to effect repairs within 72 hours of receipt of the report.

Having regard to the high level of demand, it is considered the current achievements are satisfactory but efforts are constantly being made to effect improvements.

Currently, staff shortages are not seriously affecting operations in any area.

Tertiary Education (Question No. 4790)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 9 October 1979:

  1. Following the Minister’s reply to my question No. 3569 (Hansard, 7 June 1979, page 3177), what was concluded in the reports presented to the Australian Education Council meeting in June 1979 by the working parties established by the Council in December 1978 (a) to investigate the co-ordination of planning and administration between the Tertiary Education Commission or the establishment of more appropriate consultative arrangements and (b) to compile information on the transition from school to work.
  2. Is it a fact that the Government will not introduce shared funding for tertiary education as a topic for discussion at future meetings of the Australian Education Council.
  3. Is it also a fact that the Government will not support similar moves by any State representative on the Council.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The Minister for Education has provided the following answer to the honourable members question:

  1. 1 ) (a) The Working Party on Commonwealth/State Coordination of Post-Secondary Education made a number of recommendations all of which were adopted by the Australian Education Council at its meeting in June 1979.

The implementation of these recommendations means that new arrangements are being established with the States for co-operation over the planning and administration of tertiary education. There will be regular consultative meetings between the Tertiary Education Commission and State coordinating authorities to discuss general matters in regard to policies and procedures, and to provide a forum for dealing with Australia-wide issues relating to the balanced and coordinated development of tertiary education. There will also be detailed consultation between Commonwealth and State authorities over the preparation of triennial plans.

  1. 1 ) (b) The AEC Working Party on Education and Employment presented its report to the special June 1979 meeting of the Australian Education Council. The Working Party made recommendations for the further development of practical action to assist young people in the transition from school to possible employment. These recommendations included that all schools and education systems give immediate attention to the early identification of students considered likely to be ‘at risk’ in the transition from school to work, that schools be encouraged to experiment with alternative programs relevant to the wide ranging needs of students, that the AEC examine means of facilitating re-entry of early school leavers to the education system, particularly to TAFE, that work experience programs and link courses be expanded, that transition services be expanded for special g roups, e.g. non-English-speaking students. Aboriginals, the handicapped, country and transient students, and that initiatives be taken to involve the community in transition education.

The Australian Education Council at its June 1979 meeting set up a small Standing Committee on Transition Education to implement these recommendations and to stimulate action in the States and Territories in co-operation with widely based state committees.

  1. and (3) The Government has no plans to introduce shared funding for tertiary education as a topic for discussion at future meetings of the Australian Education Council. If the States wish, it is open to them to raise the matter individually or through the normal mechanisms of the Australian Education Council.

Job Training Programs (Question No. 4794)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 9 October 1979:

As the Journal of Industry and Commerce (June 1979) published by the Department of Industry and Commerce indicates that adjustments between the demand and supply of labour will be uncertain, piecemeal and prolonged and that unemployment and vacancies may co-exist because of shortages of certain skills or limited geographical mobility, upon what advice has the Government acted in reducing funds for job training programs by 1 7 per cent for 1 979-80.

Mr Viner:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Apart from CYSS, where there was a marginal reduction, no decisions were taken in the Budget context which would limit the overall numbers of people in training.

The major drop in expenditure is a result of the lesser demand forSYETP funds as a result of decisions taken in 1978 to make the program more effective by limiting abuses and by providing training opportunities for the young people most in need. There will be no restrictions on eligible young persons being placed in SYETP vacancies this financial year. Moreover there were significant increases in funds provided for CRAFT and for Training and Industry and Commerce.

Australian Development Assistance Bureau (Question No. 4795)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 9 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Further to his reply to question No. 3572 concerning a meeting of the Public Service Board, the Australian Development Assistance Bureau, the Department of Foreign Affairs and certain unions to discuss staffing of the Australian Development Assistance Bureau (Hansard, 24 May 1979, pages 2,413-4), will he now (a) request the Public Service Board to release to the unions represented at the relevant meetings copies of the minutes of those meetings where undertakings were alleged to have been made by the Board to supply the unions with reports of the Joint Review Committee into Staffing of the Australian Development Assistance Bureau and (b) release to public service unions copies of the joint review committee’s report.
  2. ) Did the Public Service Board undertake to provide the information set out in his reply to question No. 3572 at a meeting of the parties referred to in part (I) on 30 November 1978, while at the meeting on 18 October 1978 a more explicit commitment to provide the full report was made.
Mr Viner:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) (a) The Public Service Board has informed me that a copy of the record of proceedings of the meetings held on 18 October 1978, 30 November 1978, and 30 January 1979 between officers of the Public Service Board, the Australian Development Assistance Bureau, the Department of Foreign Affairs and certain unions was included in submissions tabled by Board Officers during the proceedings before the Full Bench of the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission relating to the Commonwealth Employees (Redeployment and Retirement) Act 1979. Unions have access to these documents which are now a matter of public record.

    1. b) I do not propose to request the Public Service Board to release the Joint Review Committee’s report to the public service unions. As was indicated in the reply to Question No. 3572, the report was an internal working document for management

  2. The Public Service Board has informed me that the record of the meeting of 18 October 1978 indicates that unions were advised that the possibility of releasing to the staff-side the report of the joint review com mittee, or extracts from it, would be examined. As was stated in the answer to Question No. 3572 the Board considered that the report, because it was an internal working document for management, could not be released in full. The unions were advised of this by letter on 3 November 1978 and again at a meeting on 30 November 1978.

Confravision Service (Question No. 4796)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 9 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the cost of providing the confravision service to businesses in Sydney and Melbourne.
  2. When is it anticipated to extend the service to Brisbane.
  3. 3 ) What are the rates for use of the service.
  4. 4 ) What percentage per year of the purchase price, installation and operating costs of the service is re-couped in those rates.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The Sydney to Melbourne confravision link was established on an experimental basis in 1972, to test the technology of audio-visual tele-conferencing, at a cost of $125,000. Annual operating costs, including maintenance, depreciation and interest charges would be of the order of $150,000.
  2. There are no plans to extend the service to Brisbane at present. Marketing trials in Europe, Japan and the USA have confirmed Telecom’s experience that services of this type are not commercially viable at this stage. However, should fuel prices continue to increase and be reflected in higher travel costs, tele-conferencing services could in future provide an attractive alternative to face-to-face conferences.
  3. $125 per hour.
  4. The return on capital and operating costs cannot be accurately determined because- about 50 per cent of usage is for in-house Telecom conferences, the TV relay link used is a part-time channel which would otherwise be used as a back-up for the working TV channels, the level of operating costs varies according to usage, and the price has been set to attract users rather than provide an economic return.

Treatment of Aborigines (Question No. 4816)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 9 October 1979:

  1. With reference to the Minister’s reply to a question without notice asked by Senator Georges (Senate Hansard, 26 September 1979, page 953) concerning an Aboriginal group which recently visited Europe, will the Minister explain in detail what he meant by saying that a highly unfavourable picture of Australia presented by the Aboriginal group was distorted and exaggerated and why the group did Australia a great disservice.
  2. Are official domination, intimidation and paternalism for Aboriginal people in Queensland substantially worse than those for Aborigines in other States and Territories.
  3. If the Minister’s hope that Mr Porter fairly presents the position as it exists does not eventuate, will the Minister take steps to see that the publicity media in Europe obtain a balanced view.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question: (1)1 was referring, in my reply to Senator Georges, to assertions made in press statements issued by Aboriginals in Europe recently that Aboriginal people have been and remain ‘the target of a consistent policy of genocide for 200 years’, that they are now in the last phase ‘leading to the complete destruction of the Australian Aboriginals’ and that the Australian Government is driven by avarice and has ruthlessly pushed aside the desires and fears of the Aboriginal people in order to start mining uranium’.

  1. This is a matter of opinion, but it is a fact that a number of communities in Aboriginal reserves in Queensland are still managed by Government officials which is not the case in other States and Territories.
  2. Action is already being taken to make available accurate information about the situation of Aboriginals in Australia to the media and interested organisations in Europe.

Departure Tax (Question No. 4826)

Mr Shack:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) What has been the total amount of departure tax collected since 24 October 1 978.
  2. What has been the cost incurred in collecting the tax and how was the cost incurred (e.g. increased staff, installation of collection booths, etc.).
  3. How many staff are employed to collect departure tax (a) around Australia and (b) at Western Australian points of departure.
  4. Are these staff engaged on other departmental duties when international passenger departures are not taking place; if not, are they paid overtime rates of pay when international passenger departures occur outside normal Public Service Board determined working hours.
Mr Mackellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) $ 1 5.970m up to 30 September 1 979.
  2. Costs incurred up to 30 September 1979 have been:

The continuing cost of collection is expected to approximate 5 per cent of revenue in 1 979-80.

  1. (a) Forty-five at 30 September 1979.

    1. Four as at 30 September 1979 (3 after 9 October 1979).

  2. Staff are engaged on other departmental duties when not required for departure tax collection purposes.

Appointees to Statutory Authorities and Corporations (Question No. 4830)

Mr Morris:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) What are the names and positions of Government appointees to Australian statutory authorities and corporations who will reach the age of 65 years in their current term of service.
  2. On what date will each reach the age of 65 years.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

There is not a list in existence which would answer precisely the question the honourable member asks about the birth dates of appointees to statutory authorities and corporations. To compile such a list would require considerable checking with authorities. If the honourable member has a specific authority in mind and would care to indicate it, I shall see what can be done to provide the relevant information.

Appointees to Federal Agencies (Question No. 4831)

Mr Morris:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Did he say in answer to question No. 3493 (Hansard, 1 May 1979, page 1715) that a similar standard of procedure is followed by (a) Liberal Party and (b) National Country Party Ministers when appointees to statutory and other bodies administered by them become the subject of criminal charges.
  2. If so, will he explain specifically why the services of Mr Harry Maurice Miller were terminated by the Minister for Administrative Services from the Bi-Centenary Committee immediately following charges being laid against Mr Miller by the NSW Corporate Affairs Commission, yet no action was taken by the National Country Party Ministers to terminate Mr Miller’s services from the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation and the board of Qantas Airways Ltd.
  3. Does he still stand by his answer to question No. 3493.
  4. What are the detailed reasons for the difference in the actions taken by the Minister for Administrative Services, the Minister for Transport and the former Minister for Primary Industry.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. The circumstances of Mr Miller’s resignations from directorship of Qantas and from his membership of the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation are explained in the answer to Question No. 4836 (Hansard, of 14 November 1979, page 3047). For technical reasons, Mr Miller’s resignation from Qantas did not become effective until 2 May 1979 but his resignation from the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation was treated as effective from 16 March 1979, the date on which Mr Sinclair had announced that he had accepted it.
  3. Yes.
  4. See answer to (2 ) above.

Public Service Board: Advertisements Concerning Industrial Disputes (Question No. 4838)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. How many advertisements has the Public Service Board placed in (a) newspapers and (b) other media concerning industrial disputes in which it has been involved in the last 4 years.
  2. What was the cost of the advertisements in (a) newspapers and ( b ) other media.
  3. Upon what resources did the Public Service Board draw to finance this advertising campaign.
  4. Was an advertising agency employed for the purpose of preparing the advertisements.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The Public Service Board has placed advertisements concerning industrial disputes in which it has been involved in newspapers on two occasions in the last four years. Other media have not been used.
  2. The total cost of the newspaper advertising was $60,124.
  3. The costs of these advertisements were met from the Incidental and Other Expenditure Item of the Board’s Administrative Expenses- Division 516.
  4. The advertisements were prepared in the Public Service Board and were placed in the normal manner by the Australian Government Advertising Service.

Fishing Laws: Foreign Offenders (Question No. 4843)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

In respect of penalties for foreign offenders of Australian fishing laws, will the Attorney-General consider holding talks with the signatories of foreign fishing agreements with the Commonwealth to discuss the possibility of enabling foreigners in breach of Australian fishing laws to serve their sentences in the penal institutions of their home country.

Mr Viner:
LP

-The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

The Fisheries Amendment Act 1978 removed imprisonment as a direct penalty in respect of offences under the Act committed by foreign fishermen, except in cases of offences relating to the obstruction of officers. This amendment accords with provisions that have been negotiated with respect to the 200 miles offshore fishing zones of coastal countries at the current United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. Instead, the Act allows for the imposition of heavy fines. In default of payment of fines imposed, foreign fishermen continue, however, to be liable to imprisonment. Imprisonment remains a penalty under the Continental Shelf (Living Natural Resources) Act 1968 that applies to the taking of sedentary species. Australia has no international obligations to allow foreigners access to those species on its continental shelf and they will not be dealt with in fisheries agreements that Australia negotiates with other countries. At present, there are no arrangements under which a person serving a sentence of imprisonment, including imprisonment in default of payment of a fine, may be transferred to another country for the purpose of serving the sentence in that other country. The conclusion of such arrangements will need to await the outcome of negotiations that are currently proceeding for a scheme for the transfer of prisoners between the States and Territories of Australia. With respect to countries which may not share the basic criminal justice system applicable in Australia, very careful consideration would have to be given to the basis for any transfer arrangements to ensure that persons transferred from Australia not only received treatment in accordance with our notions of penal justice but that they would also be required to undergo imprisonment for a sufficient period, in accordance with their Australian sentence, to deter them from breaches of Australia’s fisheries legislation in the future. The matter raised by the honourable member will, however, be kept under consideration by the Government in the light of experience in the administration of the Australian fishing zone.

Rosemount Repatriation Hospital (Question No. 4844)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, upon notice, on 10 October 1 979:

What changes have occurred in the administration staffing arrangements, resources and services at Rosemount Repatriation Hospital, Windsor, Queensland since 1 July 1978.

Mr Adermann:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Since 1 July 1978, the number of beds at Rosemount Repatriation Hospital has been reduced from 80 to 60 and the staff employed full-time reduced from 122 to 111. Activities related to the Low Vision Clinic and a position of Woodwork Instructor have, in the same period, been transferred to R.G.H. Greenslopes.

Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders on Queensland Reserves (Question No. 4849)

Mr Holding:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Did he, on 25 May 1978, indicate that within 6 months of the tabling of a committee report, the responsible Minister will make a statement in the Parliament outlining the action the Government proposes to take in relation to the recommendations contained in the report.
  2. Has his attention been drawn to the fact that a Senate Standing Committee report on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders on Queensland Reserves was tabled in November 1978 and recommended that the Commonwealth Parliament legislate to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait

Islanders in Queensland be free to manage and control their affairs and comment on the inadequacy of existing Queensland State legislation.

  1. What is the reason for him failing to ensure that the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs makes a statement to Parliament on this report and when will a statement be made.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes.
  3. Since that time there has been a continuing process of negotiation between the Commonwealth and Queensland Governments at Ministerial and official levels on matters relevant to the report. It would be premature to respond to the recommendations contained in the report until these negotiations are completed. The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has recently explained in the Senate that the Report has been the subject of debate and that he is hopeful of a definitive statement to Parliament early in the new year. (See Senate Hansard, 14 November 1979, page 2241 ).

Joint Fishing Ventures (Question No. 4851)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Further to his recent statement that the Government had approved a number of joint fishing ventures involving interests from Japan, South Korea, the United States of America and Poland, what were the ventures approved, specifying in each case, (a) the companies, firms, or individuals involved in the agreement (b) the approximate sea area and its location in respect of the Australian coastline covered by each particular agreement, (c) the fish species, proposed to be sought, under each agreement, (d) the number of ships, their size and the number of crew employed or proposed to be employed, on each ship, involved or proposed to be involved in fishing or the servicing of a fishing fleet, (e) the estimated potential size of the fishing catch and its approximate value and (0 whether any fish caught under an agreement would be available for processing or for being sold either fresh or frozen in Australia.
  2. 2 ) If processing or sale is to take place in Australia what is the location of the plant involved m the processing or the port at which the fish will be purchased or sold, either fresh or frozen.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The information sought by the honourable member is contained in the following schedule. It has not been possible to provide details of the estimated potential size of the catch or its value as they have yet to be determined.

Radioactive Waste (Question No. 4852)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Did the High Commissioner in Singapore, by confidential cable to his Department, criticise the Western Mining Corporation for failure to accept responsibility for radioactive waste being stored at Singapore Steel Works.
  2. Have difficulties arisen in Australia’s relationship with Singapore following disclosure of this matter; if so, what are the details.
  3. Has the Government intervened to require the Western Mining Corporation to retrieve this waste material; if so, how has it intervened and what arrangements have been made; if not, what future action is proposed.
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The question refers to confidential advice to my Department regrettably leaked to the media. In carrying out their responsibilities to protect and advance Australian interests, Australia’s representatives abroad are involved in the submission of advice which is considered but not necessarily followed.
  2. No. Statements on the matter were made by the Singapore and Western Australian Governments in December 1978 and were reported in the Press at the time. The Australian Government has not been approached by the Singapore Government on the matter.
  3. No. The Government has sought to keep informed about the facts of the matter which it hopes can be satisfactorily resolved between the Companies concerned in Australia and Singapore.

Aboriginal Self -management: Barwon Community (Question No. 4855)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 10 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to statutory declarations by G. D. Rose, President, and C. E. R. Simpson, manageress, both of Barwon Aboriginal Community Limited, regarding conversations in June and July 1979, and a letter enclosing those declarations to K. Martin from F. Roberts dated 3 October 1979.
  2. If so, has funding to the Barwon Community been restricted or curtailed because of personal friction or a failure of the principles of Aboriginal self-management and a lapse in public service ideals by a public servant.
  3. What steps have been taken to reassure Mr Roberts and the Barwon Community that non-involved responsible decision-makers will ensure that justice is done and seen to be done in this case.
Mr Viner:
LP

– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) Yes.
  2. Funding to Barwon Aboriginal Community Ltd had been deferred because of financial management problems in the company. An interim release of funds was made in October pending discussions with the Company.
  3. The letter to Mr Martin referred to was signed by Mr Roberts on 3 October and was received in Sydney on5 October. Mr Martin has now replied to this letter. I am informed that this reply indicated that all the accusations made are without foundation.

Excise on Low Alcohol Beer (Question No. 4860)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 1 1 October 1979:

Has he received representations on lowering the excise on low alcohol beer; if so, what action does he propose to take.

Mr Fife:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I have received a number of representations on this issue in recent weeks. While the Government has taken no decision to reduce the excise payable on lower alcohol beer the matter remains under consideration. The Government also has under study a report of the Senate Standing Committee on Social Welfare which has made recommendations on this matter.

Committee of Inquiry into Public Libraries (Question No. 4861)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice, on 1 1 October 1979:

As he has now been able to announce the decisions which the Government has made on his submissions concerning the report of the Committee of Inquiry on Museums and National Collections which was tabled on5 November 1975, will he say whether he has yet made submissions on the report which the Committee of Inquiry into Public Libraries made on 27 February1976.

Mr Ellicott:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to the Ministerial Statement on Assistance to Public Libraries I made on 13 November 1979(Hansard, 13 November 1979, pages 2887-8).

Tertiary Education Assistance Scheme (Question No. 4865)

Mr Connolly:
BRADFIELD, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 11 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Do conditions governing the payment of Tertiary Education Assistance Scheme allowances preclude the recipients being eligible for supporting parents benefits; if not, how many recipients of the allowances are receiving supporting parents benefits.
  2. What consideration has the Government given to the elimination of this situation.
  3. What would be the estimated annual saving if this duplication of support payments was eliminated.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The Minister for Education has provided the following reply to the honourable member’s question:

  1. Recipients of supporting parents benefit are not precluded from receiving benefits under the Tertiary Education Assistance Scheme (TEAS). Supporting parents benefits are regarded as income and means-tested under

TEAS on the same basis as income from other sources such as employment.

During 1978 approximately I SOO TEAS beneficiaries were entitled to supporting parents benefit.

  1. and (3) The Government recently reviewed the situation and decided that recipients of supporting parents benefit should continue to be eligible for means-tested benefits under student assistance schemes. This decision took into consideration the generally disadvantaged situation of single parents and the additional costs they necessarily incur in undertaking full-time study. For the reason mentioned in ( 1 ) it is not considered that any duplication of benefits is involved.

International Air Freight Services (Question No. 4866)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 1 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the minimum import shipment size to which (a) charter freight airlines and (b) scheduled airlines bringing imports into Australia are restricted.
  2. ) What is the size of the average shipment carried by ( a) charter freight airlines and (b) scheduled airlines.
  3. Is there a difference in the minimum shipment size by charter freight airlines and scheduled airlines; if so what is the reason.
  4. Which organisations operated air freight services to and from Austrafia in each of the last S years.
  5. What quantities of goods by category were (a) imported and (b) exported by air freight in each year since 1973-74.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. (a) Non-scheduled operators are normally restricted to the carriage of a single homogenous shipment from a single consignor to a single consignee. However when a full aircraft load of export meat is carried on a non-scheduled flight, the operator may carry six separate shipments, each of 3000 kgs minimum weight, on the inbound flight to Australia. In addition, two meat exporters each have been allowed the further concession that when they have arranged one meat export flight per week under the preceding condition, they may then arrange a second flight per week carrying ten separate shipments, each of 1500 kgs minimum weight, on the inbound flight; provided that these shipments are uplifted from ports not directly linked by scheduled services to the Australian port of entry.
  2. 1 ) (b) No minimum shipment size is prescribed.
  3. (a) and (b) There is considerable variability among routes in the composition and annual tonnages of freight carried by air into Australia. Hence statistics on size of average shipment are not compiled.
  4. Yes. The Air Navigation Act requires (Section 14 (4) (b)) that in considering applications for permission to operate non-scheduled flights regard be paid to, inter alia, the need to provide reasonable protection for the operators of regular public air transport services between Australia and other countries so as to ensure the maintenance of regular air transport services for the carriage of passengers, cargo and mail between Australia and other countries’.
  5. Comprehensive information is not readily available for the last five years. All licensed international scheduled airlines offer freight services to and from Australia. These airlines are listed in the 1976-77 and 1977-78 Department of

Transport Annual Reports which were tabled in the Parliament.

Airlines which operated non-scheduled freight flights to or from Australia in 1978 were listed in my answer to Question No. 3425 given on I May 1979. During 1979 the following airlines have to date operated non-scheduled freight flights to or from Australia.

International Aviation Services (UK) Ltd, Transmeridian Air Cargo Ltd, British Cargo Airlines, Cargolux Airlines International SA, Trans International Airlines Inc., Trans America Airlines Inc., The Flying Tiger Line, Japan Airlines, Ansett Airlines of Australia Ltd, Bush Pilots Airways Ltd, Air Express Ltd, Interstate Parcel Express Company Pty Ltd, Trans Australia Airlines, Korean Airlines, Safe Air Ltd, Global International Airlines, North West Territorial Airways, Alaska International Air Inc., Air Niugini, Talair Pty Ltd, Stillwell Aviation Australasia Pty Ltd, Qantas Airways Ltd.

  1. Details of exports carried by air are given in Australian Bureau of Statistics Catalogue 8.25 ( 1 973-74/ 1 976-77) and Catalogue 541S.0 (1977-78). Comparable statistics are not available for imports carried by air.

Security Arrangements at Official Establishments (Question No. 4871)

Mr James:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 1 1 October 1 979:

What has been the cost of improving existing, or the implementation of new, security arrangements at (a) Government House, Canberra, (b) The Lodge, (c) Kirribilli House and (d) Admiralty House since December 1 975.

Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Costs incurred to mid-October 1979 amount to approximately $180,000. Further planned work is expected to cost an additional $100,000. In accordance with the long established practice (see my predecessor’s answer to Question No. 3165, House of Representatives Hansard, 4 November 1975, page 2776) I do not propose to provide separate figures for individual residences.

Security measures which have been taken and which will continue to be taken are those assessed as appropriate in the circumstances by officials responsible for security matters.

Advance Purchase Excursion Fares (Question No. 4877)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 1 October 1979:

How many advance purchase seats for flights to (a) London, (b) Athens, (c) Hong Kong and (d) San Francisco for the 1980 off peak period were unfilled as at (a) I August 1979, (b) 10 August 1979 and (c) 27 August 1979.

Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

The international airlines which offer the recently introduced APEX fares from Australia to these destinations have provided the following information:

The dates shown do not exactly correspond with those requested because the Qantas and British Airways accounting periods do not match the dates specified in the question. As APEX fares to Hong Kong were not announced until mid August 1979, the Qantas data for that destination is only available from 29 August 1979.

I am advised that Cathay Pacific is unable to provide the information requested in respect of its services to Hong Kong.

Sporting Visas (Question No. 4884)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 1 1 October 1979:

  1. Will he reconsider appeals for permanent residency made by certain persons who came to this country under the terms of sporting visas during 1 975.
  2. Is it a fact that during a period of 4 years these and other sportsmen and women develop personal and financial ties which make departure at the end of that period most difficult; if so, will he review the terms upon which sporting visas are issued.
Mr MacKellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Within the scope of policy, provision exists for sportsmen and women in the top levels of their sport to be considered for change of status if they meet certain migrant criteria, are considered to be economically viable, and their presence here contributes to the advancement of their sport and to the benefit of aspiring players in Australia.

Applications for permanent residency from other sportsmen and women who have been here since 1975 would be considered on their individual merits, allowing for such factors as marriage to an Australian resident, family disposition and ability to maintain themselves without recourse to dependence on social welfare.

  1. It is recognised that sportsmen and women over a period of 4 years in Australia would develop personal and financial ties. As stated, cases presenting special circumstances would be looked at on an individual basis, but there is no intention of relaxing the rules related to change of status for sportsmen and women beyond those already outlined.

There is no reason why sportsmen and women who intend to stay in Australia indefinitely or for extended periods should not apply for migrant entry rather than temporary entry at the outset and so obviate a need to seek change of status after arrival. This in fact is the correct procedure for such persons to follow.

Consideration is currently being given to a variation of the rules relating to the issue of temporary entry visas to sportsmen and women, which in some instances will limit the numbers being admitted to Australia temporarily, so that Australian residents of equal talent will be given opportunities to enter the higher levels of sports. Such an approach, however, would still allow for the temporary entry of sportsmen and women whose skills were regarded by the appropriate sporting national body as of benefit to a particular sport. No other review of policy in this regard is contemplated at present.

Insurance of Aboriginal Assets (Question No. 4888)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 16 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is the Department of Aboriginal Affairs intending to proceed or proceeding with bulk billed insurance of Aboriginal assets.
  2. If so, what stage have negotiations reached.
  3. ) Were public tenders called as is normal practice; if not, on whose instructions were they not called.
  4. How many firms are now involved in negotiations with the Department and what are their names.
  5. Have any insurance firms dropped out of negotiations, or been dismissed from them by the Department negotiators; if so, what are their names and why have they ceased negotiating.
  6. Was an approach made by former Liberal Member of Parliament Mr John Jess to a Government Minister in relation to the bulk billing arrangements.
  7. ) Did that Government Minister then approach the then Minister for Aboriginal Affairs in relation to the same matter.
  8. What instructions to the Department by the then Minister for Aboriginal Affairs resulted from that approach.
  9. What actions did the Department take in relation to bulk billing insurance following an internal memorandum from the then Minister to his Department referring to that same subject.
  10. 10) What is the estimated value to an insurance company of handling this policy.
  11. What is the estimated value of the Aboriginal assets to be bulk billed.
  12. 1 2) What types of assets are they.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. and (2) No.
  2. Public tenders were not called as it was neither practicable nor appropriate to do so. This decision was taken by the Department in consultation with the Department of Finance. The role of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs was limited to the selection of a broker who would examine the feasibility of developing a bulk insurance package involving various types of insurance to be available for purchase by Aboriginal organisations at concessional rates. It did not extend to the administration of any contract nor was any payment from the Public Account involved.
  3. See(l).
  4. Four brokers declined to submit bids and withdrew from negotiations:

Stenhouse Reed Shaw Ltd

Sedgwick Forbes Leslie Pty Ltd

  1. J. Ranger and Associates Pty Ltd Minet Australia Limited.

No broker was dismissed.

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes.
  3. To proceed with the evaluation of the bulk insurance proposal as a matter of priority.
  4. Proceeded with evaluation of the feasibility of bulk insurance for Aboriginal organisations.
  5. 10) Total premiums paid p.a. prior to commencement of bulk insurance negotiations was estimated as $2. 6m.
  6. Current valuation is not accurately known.
  7. Assets include vehicles, houses, other buildings/ properties, fences, bores, stock, plant and equipment, office equipment, business stock in trade.

Aboriginal Affairs Grants (Question No. 4891)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 16 October 1979:

  1. Did the Department of Aboriginal Affairs grant money to Government, semi-government or private companies with which Mr Paul Stewart of Tamworth, N.S.W., was associated during the last 3 years.
  2. If so, how many companies received these grants.
  3. What was the total value of these grants.
  4. To whom were the grants given.
  5. Were the grants used for the purposes for which they were given and what were those purposes.
  6. If they were not used for those purposes, what were they used for.
Mr Viner:
LP

– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) to (6) I refer the honourable member to my answer to Question No. 4668 and to my statement in response to Questions Without Notice in the Senate on 23 October 1979 (Hansard, page 1610).

Aboriginal Employment Grants (Question No. 4892)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 16 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many Aboriginal employment positions did the Department of Aboriginal Affairs fund in the Tamworth, N.S. W. area, during 1 977 and 1 978.
  2. ) What was the total value of the funds provided.
  3. Were private companies required, as their part of the bargain, to keep an equivalent number of Aborigines employed with their own funds for an equivalent period of time after the Department of Aboriginal Affairs’ grant had been spent.
  4. How many Government funded companies fully complied with those obligations.
  5. Was a Mr Paul Stewart, or a member of his family, associated with any of the companies which complied.
  6. What action has the Government taken to recover Government grants from companies that did not keep their part of the bargain and what sum is to be recovered in each case.
Mr Viner:
LP

– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) Thirty-one positions in 1 977 and three positions in 1978.
  2. $153,908.
  3. Yes.
  4. Five.
  5. Yes.
  6. It is not possible to recover grants already paid out from Companies that do not continue to employ Aboriginals on their pay roll.

Repatriation: Lunch Allowances (Question No. 4898)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, upon notice, on 1 6 October 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Has his attention been drawn to motion No. 75 carried at the 64th National Congress of the R.S.L. condemning the action of the Government in deleting lunch allowances for war veterans attending medical appointments with his Department unless they are away from home more than 13 hours.
  2. If so, will he consider the request that payment be made where veterans are away from home between 1000 and 1400 hours.
Mr Adermann:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. As from1 November 1979, meal allowance was increased to the rate paid to Commonwealth Public Servants. It will henceforth be automatically adjusted in line with that rate and will be paid subject to the same conditions. Travelling and mileage allowances were similarly adjusted. Under the conditions applying to meal allowances persons away from home or work only during the period 10.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. are not eligible to receive a meal allowance. However, as I indicated in my answer to question No. 4897 (Hansard, 6 November 1979, P2676) meals are provided free of charge to certain day patients at Repatriation hospitals. The decision to modify the amount and conditions under which meal allowance is payable will benefit veterans and I see no reason for its reconsideration.

Antarctica (Question No. 4904)

Dr Blewett:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 16 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) On what grounds does Australia base its claims of sovereignty in Antarctica.
  2. Is it a fact, as stated in the Australian of 19 September 1979, that Australia’s sovereignty claims angered Third World observers at the 10th Antarctic Treaty consultation meeting in Washington, USA?
  3. Did USA officials at the consultation state, as reported in the Australian that Australia’s policy on Antarctia was amazing and invalid; if so, which officials made the statements and to whom.
  4. Did he authorise an article in the Washington Post of 18 September 1979 which took the form of a policy statement.
  5. Has the Government considered the possibility of the inter-nationalisation of Antarctica; if so, what attitude has it formulated; if not, why not.
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Australia ‘s title in international law rests on acts of discovery and formal claims of title by British and Australian explorers, the formal transfer of the territory from Britain to Australia and Australian acceptance by legislation, and subsequent acts showing an intention by Australia to exercise sovereignty over the Territory. This intention is demonstrated, inter alia, by the application by Australia of legislation to the Territory, the negotiation and conclusion of Treaties affecting the Territory and by engagement in a degree of administrative activity there. Having regard to the particular physical conditions experienced in Antarctica, a principal form of Australian administrative activity is related to the presence of Australian scientific research bases and a program of exploration and scientific work in the Australian Antarctic Territory.
  2. I am not aware of any such reactions as were reported in the Australian. Nor were there any Third World observers at the Tenth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. Two Third World countries- Argentina and Chile- did participate as Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties. Neither have ever expressed to us any displeasure about Australia’s sovereignty claims.
  3. No such statements were made by United States officials to any Australian representatives at the Tenth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. Australia’s position in relation to the Australian Antarctic Territory is well known to the United States authorities.
  4. I am not aware of any article on Antarctica in the Washington Post of 18 September 1979, but on 17 September 1 979 an article in the Washington Post reported comments made by the leader of the Australian delegation, Ambassador Brennan, in response to several questions directed to him at a press briefing seminar on ‘Antarctic Resources and the Environment’ held in Washington on 14 September 1979. Ambassador Brennan ‘s comments reflected Australia’s official position.
  5. Australia already participates in an important international regime in Antarctica; that is, the regime established by the Antarctic Treaty. Our support for that regime is based in pan on the fact that one of its principal purposes is to ensure that Antarctica continues to be used only for peaceful purposes. In the twenty years since the Treaty was signed Australia and the other Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties have adopted and implemented many measures in furtherance of the objectives of the Treaty, including measures for the protection and preservation of the Antarctic environment. The Parties have also turned their attention to the problems associated with issues relating to the living and non-living resources of Antarctica. Australia is thus not insensitive to developing international interest, including

Third World interest, in Antarctica. As I said in a Foreign Policy statement in the House on IS March 1977, Australia sees the need to define its national interest in Antarctica in terms which recognise its potential importance to the whole of mankind.

Citizenship Applications (Question No. 4907)

Dr Cass:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 1 6 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many persons, showing their country of binh, marital status and sex, applied for citizenship after residing in Australia for (a) up to 6 months, (b) 6 to 12 months, (c) I to 3 years, (d) 3 to 6 years, (e) 6 to 12 years and (f) over 12 years during each year from 1960 to 1978.
  2. How many persons in each group were granted citizenship, how many applications are still under consideration, and how many applications have been rejected.
Mr Mackellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. and (2) The detail sought about applicants for Australian citizenship is not maintained in any readily available form. Statistics of persons granted citizenship by country of former citizenship and year of arrival in Australia can however be compiled and will be made available to the honourable member as soon as possible.

Statistics of applications for Australian citizenship refused are included in the answer to Question No. 4909.

Immigration Applications (Question No. 4908)

Dr Cass:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 16 September 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many persons, showing their country of birth, applied to immigrate to Australia during each year from 1960 to 1978.
  2. How many of these persons were granted immigration visas.
Mr Mackellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) Statistics on the birthplaces of applicants for migration to Australia are not maintained. Complete details of applications by country of application are available only since 1 974-75. They are contained in the following table, which also shows visa issues by country of selection which may in a small number of instances diner from country of application. It should also be noted that because application may be made in one year and approval given in the next, visas issued in a year do not necessarily correspond to applications in the same year.

Citizenship Applications (Question No. 4909)

Dr Cass:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 16 October 1979:

  1. How many applications for Australian citizenship, showing the country of birth of the applicants, were received during each year from 1960 to 1978.
  2. How many persons were granted Australian citizenship during each of the same years.
  3. What was the average lapse of time between lodgement of the application and the granting of citizenship.
  4. What were the main grounds for rejection of applications and how many applications were rejected in each category.
Mr MacKellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Not available.
  2. 1960-50,268, 1961-41,895, 1962-53,21 1, 1963-43,509, 1964-36,305, 1965-37,550, 1966-35,476, 1967-49,635, 1968-44,926, 1969-38,370, 1970-36,265, 1971-38,799, 1972-38,402, 1973-57,102, 1974-87,549, 1975-84,059, 1976-118,189, 1977-70,706, 1978-65,094.
  3. The average processing time at present from the date of receipt of application until the date of approval is approximately 15 weeks.

The average time between the approval of an application and conferral of citizenship varies considerably. Where applicants choose to have citizenship conferred at ceremonies conducted by officers of the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, the average time is only several weeks. However where citizenship is conferred at ceremonies arranged by local government authorities, the time factor is governed by the frequency of ceremonies arranged by individual local government authorities.

(4)-

Community Relations Education (Question No. 4910)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 16 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has the Minister’s attention been drawn to the references to the (a) importance of the role of schools in community education for improved community relations and ( b) limited resources currently available for this purpose, which are contained in the 4th Annual Report of the Commissioner for Community Relations.
  2. If so, has the Minister allocated an increase in any funds under his control to combat the reported activities of racist groups (such as the Immigration Control Association) in schools; if not, will the Minister do so.
  3. 3 ) What is the current status and usage of the teaching kit on Aboriginal Society which was developed by the Curriculum Development Centre.
  4. Will the Minister give consideration to increasing the use and distribution of this kit, as a matter of urgency.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The Minister for Education has provided the following reply.

  1. and (2) I have noted the reference in the 4th Annual Report of the Commissioner for Community Relations to the role of the school in improving community relations. I would point out that there are a number of initiatives currently being undertaken. As a result of the Government’s acceptance in May 1978 of the Report on Post-arrival Programs and Services to Migrants (the Galbally Report) which are designed to stimulate improvements in this important field.

Under Recommendation 45 an additional amount of $5m is being provided by the Commonwealth over a three year period, commencing in 1979, to assist in the area of multicultural education in schools. This program will support activities in both government and non-government school systems, and the bulk of the funds will be allocated to particular projects on the advice of representative committees convened in each State. One intended outcome of this program is to assist in combatting any racist influences which may seek to have an effect within Australian schools. It is anticipated that a substantial amount of the funds provided will go towards the development of appropriate resource materials.

As a follow up to Recommendation 14, the Government is providing a further $.324m over three years to assist Australian professionals working with large numbers of migrant clients to obtain or upgrade language skills, and understand cultural differences. Pilot courses under this program commenced during the 1978-79 financial year, and further courses are currently being mounted. Participants in a number of these courses have included school teachers, and this program is therefore assisting to promote the goals of inter-cultural understanding and racial harmony within Australian schools.

In response to Recommendation 48, the Tertiary Education Commission has approached tertiary institutions throughout Australia with a view to having components on the cultural background of ethnic groups included in appropriate professional courses. In the area of teacher training, such an initiative should help to ensure that teachers entering the school system will have a better understanding of cultural differences and be more sensitive to the multicultural reality of the Australian community.

  1. and (4) The ‘Aboriginal Australian in North Eastern Arnhem Land’, developed by the Curriculum Development Centre was mailed (field tested) in schools in NSW, SA, ACT, WA and NT during 1978, and in schools in Vic, Tas., WA, SA and ACT during 1979. It is proposed to conclude the mailing at the end of first semester 1980, with further trials in Qld (4), NSW (3) and WA ( 1 ). In total, 18 schools will have been involved in the mailing over a period of21/2 years. All participating teachers have attended an inservice course conducted by the authors prior to the trailling.

The final 4 of 42 titles of the basic materials are being completed and will be trailled during the first semester in 1980 along with all completed materials. This will complete phase 1 of the project.

Approval was recently given for the development of phase 2 of the project during 1980 and early 1981, at a cost of $1 10,200. This phase is concerned with the revision of the draft materials for publication, the production and publication of related materials (movie films, Aboriginal literature), the production and publication of a teacher inservice education package and the dissemination of all materials.

The interest in the materials being expressed by State Education Departments, as well as by individual teachers, indicates that CDC should aim to make the basic kit, and as many associated materials as possible, available for use at the start of the 1 98 1 school year. It is an expensive undertaking, and the Centre is considering ways and means of dealing with the financial ramifications of publishing this major work. Alternatives are being canvassed and the Centre will advise me of possible and preferred solutions.

As further evidence of the Government’s general concern to effect improvements in the field of Aboriginal education, it should be mentioned that the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs discussed with State and Northern Territory Ministers at a recent meeting of the Australian Education Council the promotion of Aboriginal studies in schools. The Minister stressed the importance of community education programs to enable all Australians to gain a better understanding of the present situation of Aboriginal people. The Council agreed in principle to a number of propositions, including the production of high quality resource materials covering all aspects of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs, both historic and contemporary.

Both the CDC and the Institute of Aboriginal Studies can be expected to act as valuable resources bodies as developments in this area proceed.

I also draw the honourable member’s attention to the Minister’s report ‘Child Migrant Education 1 978-79 ‘ which I tabled in the Senate on15 November 1979. The report outlines a number of programs which contribute to improved community relations. Expenditure on those programs in 1978-79 was $28.8m and in 1979-80 is estimated to be $33.5m.

Racial Discrimination (Question No. 4911)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 16 October 1979:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to the statement attributed to Mr Richard Alston, on page 14 of the 4th Annual Report of the Commissioner for Community Relations, which states in part that the Government has undermined its international obligations pursuant to its ratification of the International Convention on Racial Discrimination.
  2. If so, is he able to say whether this is the same Mr Richard Alston who is President of the Victorian Branch of the Liberal Party and President of the United Nations Association of Australia.
  3. What action does he or his Department intend to take to ensure that Australia meets its international obligations.
  4. Has he investigated the complaints noted by the Commissioner for Community Relations on page 16 of his 4th

Annual Report, concerning racist publications from the USA being sent through the mail.

  1. If so, what representations have been made to the US Government regarding its control of this material at its source.
  2. What has been the response of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to the submission it received from the Foundation for Aboriginal and Island Research Action, in which it was alleged that the Queensland Government was discriminatory in its legislation and administrative practices.
  3. Has a Legal Defence Fund to support Australian Aboriginal liberation struggles been established by the International Conference for the Eradication of Racism and Racial Discrimination.
  4. If so, has Australia made a contribution to this fund; if not, why not.
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (3)I have seen the Fourth Annual Report of the Commissioner for Community Relations. Relevant aspects of it, including the statement attributed to Mr Alston, are currently under study in my Department as well as in a number of other Departments including, of course, the Attorney-General ‘s Department

Australia, as a State Party to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, submits national reports to the Committee established under that Convention whose task it is to consider measures taken to give effect to the Convention. The Second Australian Report, which was prepared in close consultation with my Department, was considered by the Committee at its Twentieth Session in August this year and the Committee found it satisfactory. Australia takes its obligations under the Convention seriously and Departments are fully aware of the Government’s determination to ensure that these obligations are met.

  1. The Commissioner’s Report (on page 13) itself describes Mr Alston as the National President of the United Nations Association of Australia. He is also the President of the Liberal Party of Australia (Victorian Division).
  2. and (5) The question of the dissemination in Australia of ideas based on racial superiority or racial hatred is currently being studied by my colleague, the Attorney-General.
  3. It is not open to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to receive and consider communications from the Foundation for Aboriginal and Island Research Action in the matter mentioned in the question.
  4. and (8) No reports or requests concerning this fund have yet come to the notice of the Government. I should, however, note that legal defence for Australian aboriginals involved in both criminal and civil legal matters is provided by eleven independent Aboriginal legal services operating from nearly fifty offices in all States and the Northern Territory. $4.8m was appropriated by the Government for the support of these services in 1979-80.

Kampuchea (Question No. 4917)

Mr Howe:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 16 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has the Australian Government failed to adopt an even-handed approach to the question of recognition of the Government of Kampuchea; if so, why.
  2. Why has the Government not adopted the position taken, for example, by the United States Government, which recognises neither the Pol Pot nor the Heng Samrin regime.
  3. Does the Government’s policy imply that it has not ruled out the possibility of a return to power in Kampuchea of the Pol Pot regime.
  4. Is this possibility regarded by the Government as being in any way desirable.
  5. If this possibility is not desirable, can he state what proposals the Government have to avoid this possibility.
  6. On what principles did the Government justify its prompt recognition of the Lule Administration in Uganda.
  7. Is the Government using one set of principles for its policies with respect to Uganda and another in relation to Kampuchea.
  8. Similarly, why has the Government accepted the annexation of East Timor by Indonesia but failed to recognise the Heng Samrin regime in Kampuchea.
  9. Is it a fact that the principal reason for the Government’s failure to adopt a more even-handed approach with respect to Kampuchea flows from ideological factors rather than from other objective assessment of the situation there, based on Australian interests.
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. to (5) The Australian Government continues to recognise the Pol Pot regime of Democratic Kampuchea. The Government has maintained the recognition that was bestowed by the former Australian Government in 197S. The United States Government never recognised the Pol Pot regime. The Heng Samrin regime of the People’s Republic of Kampuchea, which was installed in Phnom Penh following Vietnam’s armed intervention in Kampuchea, does not appear to have superior claims to recognition. Only 23 countries, most of which are pro-Soviet, recognise the Heng Samrin regime. There is evidence to suggest that, without Vietnam’s active military support and presence, the Heng Samrin regime could not survive.

Australia and other like-minded countries in the region cannot condone Vietnam’s use of force to overthrow the legitimate government in Kampuchea. De-recognition of the Pol Pot regime could be interpreted as tantamount to endorsing the right of Vietnam to intervene militarily in the affairs of other states in the region.

The Government’s policy towards Kampuchea is based on the belief that only a negotiated settlement, in which all interests are involved, can bring peace and stability to Kampuchea. A pre-requisite for the establishment of an independent, neutral and popular government in Kampuchea, free of Great Power rivalries, is the withdrawal of Vietnamese armed forces. The Government would be willing to support any international efforts to achieve these objectives.

  1. On 17 April the Australian Government announced its recognition of the new Government in Uganda headed then by Dr Youssufu Lule and now by Mr Godfrey Binaisa. The Australian Government upholds those general international principles which call for respect for international borders and the sovereign integrity of States, and the settlement of disputes by peaceful means. For this reason it cannot condone the Tanzanian incursion. There are, however, elements in this situation which make it a special case. The authority of the administration in Kampala extends throughout the country, whereas the Heng Samrin regime in Phnom Penh does not effectively control Kampuchea and would not in any case survive without the support of the Vietnamese armed forces.
  2. and (8) The situations in East Africa, East Timor and Indo-China are not comparable or analogous.
  3. No.

Foreign Fishing Vessels (Question No. 4927)

Mr Humphreys:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 1 7 October 1 979:

  1. Will foreign fishing vessels licensed to fish in the Australian Fishing Zone (a) make application for licences on an approved form prior to entry into the 200 mile Australian Fishing Zone, ( b ) pay appropriate licence fees prior to entry , (c) have to report locations each week, (d) provide accommodation for Government observers, (e) supply to authorities statistics on their catch rate and the area of fishing prior to departure and (0 have to report prior to arrival and departure.
  2. Will licensed foreign fishing vessels be allowed access to Australian ports; if so, at what rate would port access fees apply.
  3. Will trans-shipment of the catch of foreign vessels be made compulsory.
  4. What are the benefits of compulsory trans-shipment.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. (a)Yes.

    1. Yes.
    2. The masters of all licensed foreign fishing boats in the Australian fishing zone are required to report by radio to the Australian Coastal Surveillance Centre the position of their boat every two days after the boat enters the Australian fishing zone.
    3. Yes.
    4. The masters of all licensed foreign fishing boats are required to provide by way of log books biological and other data concerning all fishing undertaken by their boats in the Australian fishing zone. All Australian log books completed by the masters of foreign fishing boats must be returned to Australian authorities prior to departure of the boat from the Australian fishing zone. Those masters of foreign fishing boats permitted to use the log books used by Government agencies in their country are required to return a copy of the completed log book to Australian authorities within a specified period of returning to their country of origin. In addition to the log book system masters of foreign fishing boats are required to report by radio to the Australian Coastal Surveillance Centre catch and fishing effort data every six days.
    5. The masters of all licensed foreign fishing boats are required to report to the Australian Coastal Surveillance Centre their intention to enter or depart from the Australian fishing zone together with the position where they intend to enter and depart from the zone.
  2. All foreign fishing boats licensed under the Fisheries Act 19S2 will be permitted entry to the ports specified in the licence issued in respect of each boat. The port access fees payable by masters of foreign boats are a matter for the relevant State authorities to determine. However, access fees paid by foreign fishermen in relation to the issue of licences under the Fisheries Act 1 952 do not exempt such operators from payment of fees associated with port entry or other services.
  3. No. There is no barrier to licensed foreign fishing boats transhipping product in a port ‘ of entry specified in the respective boat licences. However, transhipment of product in such a port t is a matter for determination by the respective vessels operators. At this time, transhipment of product at sea by any foreign fishing vessel is not permitted.
  4. Compulsory transhipment of product at sea by foreign vessels would pose major problems in terms of the enforcement of licence conditions particularly in relation to catch quotas and data collection. There are obvious benefits to be gained by the various State authorities where product is transhipped in a port.

Uniform Road Laws (Question No. 4937)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 7 October 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Is he able to say what studies have been made in recent years into the lack of uniformity in road laws in Australia and what those studies have found.
  2. If so, what are the specific areas of road laws State by State, in which there is a lack of uniformity.
  3. What have been the results of the lack of uniformity in road laws in Australia in respect of (a) road safety, (b) transport efficiency and (c) additional costs of manufacture of road vehicles.
  4. What action has he taken to overcome the lack of uniformity of road laws in Australia since 197S and what have been the results.
  5. Do constitutional provisions impede the introduction of uniform load laws ii Australia; if so, in what way.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. A major objective of the consultative machinery within the Australian Transport Advisory Council (ATAC) is the achievement of a greater degree of uniformity of road laws in Australia. There have been no studies as such in recent years as the desirability of uniformity is accepted.

One of the major current tasks being undertaken by ATAC’s Advisory Committee on Road User Performance and Traffic Codes is a comprehensive review of the National Road Traffic Code which for road safety and traffic flow improvement serves as a model for adoption by the States and Territories. The review is based on an assessment of States’ conformity with it so as to enable consideration of changes to the Code or to State legislation to reflect desirable national requirements. The Committee’s review is nearing completion and recommendations flowing from its work will be reported in the near future for further consideration by other relevant committees of ATAC.

  1. A substantial degree of uniformity in the intent of road traffic laws has been achieved, the main differences insofar as they could potentially affect safety being giving way requirements at intersections in Victoria and Western Australia differ in some respects from other States general open road speed limits are not uniform, being either 100 km/h or 1 10 km/h drink/driving legislation varies in matters of detail and procedures the meaning of various longitudinal pavement markings such as double centre lines and unbroken lane lines is not uniform.

It is not possible to list all aspects of non-uniformity as such information, in the level of detail sought, is not presently available.

  1. No information is available with regard to the results of lack of uniformity in respect of transport efficiency or additional costs of manufacture. With regard to road safety it is unlikely that differences in road traffic law have a large effect on accidents. The vast majority of accidents- about 95 per cent- involve drivers within their State of residence. There is no information available on the extent to which nonuniformity of traffic laws was a factor in the remaining accidents.
  2. Progress towards uniformity of road laws is discussed regularly at meetings of ATAC. I have continued to press strongly for a greater commitment towards uniformity. A recent result has been the adoption of a uniform meaning throughout Australia for the ‘STOP’ sign and other initiatives are expected to flow from the work described under ( I ).
  3. The constitutional framework in Australia means that progress towards uniformity in road laws must be made by way of consensus and the ATAC procedures provide the machinery through which the necessary consensus is established.

Road Freight Vehicles (Question No. 4938)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 17 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) What are the principal differences State by State in regulations governing the registration and operation of road freight vehicles.
  2. What has been the effect of the differing regulations in respect of (a) costs of manufacture of road freight vehicles, (b) operation and interstate road freight vehicles, (c) transport efficiency and freight rates and (d) road safety.
  3. 3 ) Which organisation is responsible for the development of uniform regulations for the design, manufacture and use of road freight vehicles in Australia and what progress has it made since 1 975.
  4. When will uniform regulations for the design, manufacture and use of road freight vehicles be achieved in Australia and how.
  5. Do constitutional provisions impede the introduction of uniform regulations in Australia; if so, how.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Information on State regulations governing the registration and operation of road freight vehicles is best sought from those authorities which have the appropriate regulatory role. At the national level, however, the principal standards relating to the safety aspects of freight vehicle registration and operation are found in

    1. the Australian Design Rules for Motor Vehicle Safety
    2. the Draft Regulations Defining Vehicle Construction, Equipment and Performance Standards for Road Vehicles
    3. the National Road Traffic Code.

The Design Rules are applied uniformly throughout Australia at the point of first registration of vehicles. Information is not readily available to determine the extent to which the Draft Regulations and the National Road Traffic Code have been incorporated into legislation in each State.

  1. There is no information available on the effect of differing regulations with respect to costs of manufacture or operation of freight vehicles or transport efficiency and freight rates. With regard to road safety, see answer to question 4937.
  2. The Australian Transport Advisory Council (ATAC) is responsible for consideration of transport matters at the national level including uniformity of standards. Two of its advisory committees, the Advisory Committee on Safety in

Vehicle Design and the Advisory Committee on Vehicle Performance, are responsible for recommending Design Rules and Draft Regulations for ATAC’s consideration. A further Committee, the Advisory Committee on Road User Performance and Traffic Codes is responsible for developing the National Road Traffic Code.

Since 1975, the following Design Rules relating to road freight vehicles have been endorsed:

ADR 28A Motor Vehicle Noise

ADR 30 Diesel Engine Exhaust Smoke Emissions

ADR 32 Seat Belts for Heavy Vehicles

ADR 35 Commercial Vehicle Braking Systems

ADR 36 Exhaust Emission Control for Heavy Duty Vehicles

Since 1975, Draft Regulations have been revised or introduced on the following aspects of freight vehicle safety and operation: revision of requirements for load and dimensional limits revision of in-service noise requirements specification of maximum turning circle for combinations of vehicle and trailer.

  1. Work is proceeding within the ATAC system to progressively increase the level of uniformity of vehicle regulations. It is not possible to set a timetable on this continuing activity.
  2. 5 ) See answer to question 4937.

Shipping Freight Rates (Question No. 4946)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 7 October 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Has his attention been drawn to a statement by Mr H. J. O ‘Regan, Managing Director of Associated Container Transportation (Aust) Ltd that freight rates negotiated with Shipping Liner Conferences compare more than favourably with domestic transportation costs in terms of stability and predictability.
  2. Is he able to provide evidence which might confirm or refute this statement by Mr O ‘Regan.
  3. Is this stability and predictability referred to by Mr O ‘Regan the major factor in the Government’s policy of permitting Liner Conferences in shipping lines to Australia; if not, what weight is attached to it by the Government in its determination of policy towards liner conferences.
  4. For what reason is negotiated rate fixing permitted in overseas trades but not in respect of domestic transport services.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. The evidence available from BTE and other sources tends to confirm Mr O’Regan ‘s statement. However, individual comparisons made between specific sea and land transport freight rates can be misleading.
  3. Predictability and relative stability in freight rates are major factors in shippers ‘ support for Conference services.
  4. In exchange for exemption from the Anti-Competitive Provisions (Part IV) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 Outward Shipping Conferences are required to hold meaningful negotiations with the Designated Shipper Body in accordance with the Overseas Cargo Shipping Provisions (Part X) of the Trade Practices Act. Certain individual shipowners are also required to hold such negotiations under these provisions. There is nothing to prevent freight rate negotiations in domestic transport services.

Boeing 707 Ground Support Equipment (Question No. 4952)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Administrative Services, upon notice, on 17 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) What is the specific nature of the Boeing 707 ground support equipment provided for in contracts 23-5180/79/2 and 23-1680/79/5 referred to in the Commonwealth of A ustralia Gazette ( G32 ) of 1 4 August 1979.
  2. ) For what purposes will the equipment be used.
  3. What is the expected service life of the equipment purchased.
  4. Who were the unsuccessful tenderers for the contract.
Mr John McLeay:
BOOTHBY, SOUTH AUSTRALIA · LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The specific nature of the Boeing 707 ground support equipment provided for in contracts 23-5180/79/2 and 23-1680/79/5 is-

Contract 23-5 180/79/2:

  1. Fourteen items of ground support equipment including towing tractors, generator sets, sewerage pumping unit, air conditioners, trailers for oxygen and nitrogen cylinders, aircraft jacks and engine stands;
  2. Two flight line tool kits each of seventy-eight items of tools including wrenches, spanners, pliers, gauges, et cetera.

Contract 23- 1 680/79/5:

One hundred and ninety-two maintenance supply items, including cabin press controllers, amplifiers, HF antenna tuning units, transmission assemblies, brake assemblies, main wheel and nose wheel tyres, gyros and turbo compressors. These items are required for maintenance of Boeing 707 aircraft and would also be available as replacement parts when required.

  1. The Ground Support Equipment is required for towing, minor maintenance and turn-around servicings of the aircraft The flight line tool kits contain the hand tools required for those maintenance and servicing tasks.

The maintenance supply items are being used as spare system assemblies to replace those items which become unserviceable in the aircraft. The removed items are repaired and then in turn used as replacement items when needed.

  1. Of the ground support equipment, the tractors, the generator sets diesel engine and the air conditioners have an estimated service life of mid 1982. However, it should be noted that this is a planning figure only and actual service life will be determined after survey closer to the planned date. The service life of the other items of ground support equipment has not yet been determined but is envisaged as being in the order of eight to ten years. Hand tools, such as those in the flight line tool kits, are not subject to service life definition; the items should remain in use for the foreseeable future.

Because of their repairable nature, the majority of the maintenance supply items are expected to remain in the RAAF inventory for the service life of the Boeing 707 aircraft.

  1. There were no unsuccessful tenderers. Qantas Airways Ltd, Mascot, NSW, was the only Australian based supplier capable of providing all required items ex stock. Qantas could also ensure the compatibility of the items with the RAAF Boeing 707 Aircraft and its support equipment. Timing of RAAF operations of the aircraft allowed insufficient time for the invitation of public tenders.

Nomad Aircraft Crash (Question No. 4953)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Productivity, upon notice, on 17 October 1979:

  1. Did officials from his Department investigate the causes of the crash of an Australian-built Nomad aircraft in Irian Jaya on 23 July 1979; if so, what were the findings.
  2. Has his Department asked for a report on the crash from the Indonesian Government; if so, what was the specific nature of the report.
  3. How many Nomads has Australia given to Indonesia as part of its aid program.
  4. Have any other Nomads provided or sold to Indonesia been involved in accidents or crashes; if so, what was the specific nature of each accident or crash.
Mr Macphee:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) As a result of an accident in Indonesian territory involving a privately-owned Indonesian-registered Nomad aircraft, two officers from the Department of Productivity and two from the Department of Transport accepted an invitation to visit the crash site. Under international agreement the issue of a report rests with the Indonesian authorities.
  2. Twelve Nomad Searchmaster aircraft have been supplied to Indonesia as part of an integrated Defence Cooperation program to assist the Indonesian Government’s ability to deal with smuggling, illegal entry, protection of fisheries and search and rescue within its archipelago waters.
  3. There has been one accident involving Nomad aircraft provided under the Defence Co-operation program. On 28 June 1979 an aircraft crashed on a training flight during a simulated one engine landing approach. The aircraft was severely damaged; however there was no loss of life.

Petroleum Products: Price Increases (Question No. 4964)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 18 October 1979:

Will he update his answer to my question on notice No. 2279 (Hansard, 24 November 1 978, page 3467 ).

Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to my answer to House of Representatives Question No. 4634 for details relating to price increases for petroleum products resulting from public inquiries conducted by the PJT since October 1 978.

The attached schedule updated Schedule B of my answer to House of Representatives Question No. 2279 of 24 November 1 978 and contains details of price increases found justified by the PJT for premium grade motor spirit supplied by all of the major oil companies to resellers in the Melbourne metropolitan area, from October 1978 to October 1979. It also shows the resulting maximum justified wholesale prices for premium motor spirit supplied by the companies during this period.

House and Land Prices (Question No. 4967)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 23 October 1979:

How many years’ disposable income was required by a single income family, with a dependent spouse and 2 children, receiving average annual earnings to purchase (a) a medium priced block of land, ( b ) a newly erected 2 or 3 bedroom house or flat and (c) a medium priced established 2 or 3 bedroom house or flat in each capital city during each of the years from 1 970-7 1 to 1 978-79 and for the period1 July 1979 to 1 8 October 1979.

Mr Groom:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Information for the period 1970-71 to 1978-79 is presented in the table below. Data for the period1 July 1979 to 1 8 October 1 979, and for Darwin are not available.
  1. There are no consistently compiled data on medium priced established 2 or 3 bedroom houses or flats by capital city for the period 1970-71 to 1976-77. The figures provided in the Table below are based on average prices paid by approved Home Savings Grant applicants for established separate houses for the period 1977-78 to 1978-79.

Coober Pedy Post Office (Question No. 4968)

Mr Wallis:

asked the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 23 October 1979:

  1. IsCoober Pedy, S.A., one of the few towns in South Australia with a population in excess of 2000 that is served by a non-official post office.
  2. In view of the anticipated growth in the Coober Pedy area, are there any plans by Australia Post to alter the post office to official status; if so, when will this occur.
Mr Staley:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. There are no plans, at this stage, to change the Coober Pedy Non-official Post Office to official operation. However, development at Coober Pedy, particularly the effect of the scheduled completion, late in 1980, of the Tarcoola to Alice

Springs railway, and the sealing of the Stuart Highway, expected to be completed around 1986, will be monitored closely.

The existing Non-official Post Office at Coober Pedy is coping adequately with the current level of customer demand. A change in the method of operation of the office would not affect the range of services now provided.

Housing Transactions (Question No. 4972)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 23 October 1979:

  1. What was (a) the total number of housing transactions, (b) the proportion of new and used dwellings in these total transactions, (c) the number of first home buyers and (d) the proportion of new and used dwellings purchased by first home buyers that have occurred on an average annual basis for the last 3 to 4 years.
  2. Is the estimated number of first home buyers expected to change over the next 3 to 4 years; if so, by how many and why.
Mr Groom:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. (a) (b) Official statistics on the total number of housing transactions are not available. In recent years some States have commenced the collection of information on property transactions from transfers of land titles records. This information is not collected in all States and is available only for capital cities in a number of other States.

A commonly used alternative measure is provided by official statistics on the number of housing loan approvals to individuals. A comparison of this series with data on housing transactions in States where information is available indicates that housing finance approvals account for, on average, about 90 per cent of housing transactions.

  1. No statistics are available. Discussions are being held with the Australian Bureau of Statistics with a view to obtaining this information.

  2. There are no official statistics available. Surveys undertaken in 1973 and 1974 by PA Management Consultants Pty Ld for the Commonwealth Department of Housing and Construction estimated that about 50 per cent of new dwellings were purchased by first home buyers. These surveys did not include established dwellings.

    1. In the absence of information on the number of first home buyers it is not possible to make reliable estimates of future numbers of first home buyers.

Post-graduate Scholarships (Question No. 4973)

Mr Moore:
RYAN, QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 23 October 1979:

Is it a fact that Commonwealth post-graduate scholarships are subject to taxation while postgraduate scholarships awarded by universities and private enterprise are not; if so, what action will be taken to correct this anomaly.

Mr Staley:
LP

-The Minister for Education has provided the following reply to the honourable member’s question:

Section 23 (z) of the Income Tax Assessment Act exempts income derived by way of a scholarship, bursary or other educational allowance by a student receiving full-time education at a school, college or university. Specifically excluded from the exemption are amounts received by a recipient student under bond to the person or authority from whom the allowance is received or under the National Employment and Training System (the NEAT Scheme) and the Former Regular Servicemen’s Vocational Training Scheme. Also excluded from the exemption is income derived after 31 October 1 978 under a Commonwealth Postgraduate Award, i.e., under a postgraduate award granted under the Student Assistance Act 1973.

Exclusion from the section 23 (z) exemption means that the living allowance, incidentals allowance and thesis allowance payable under a Commonwealth Postgraduate Award are now assessable income in the hands of an award holder but the travelling allowance and establishment allowance are not Expenses of self-education incurred in carrying out the terms of the Award qualify for deduction against an Award holder’s assessable income except for the first $250 of such expenditure which qualifies as concessional expenditure for concessional rebate purposes. Expenditure for which the travelling allowance and establishment allowance are paid is not an allowable income tax deduction.

This means, broadly, that Commonwealth Postgraduate Awards are subject to taxation whereas the section 23 (z) exemption would apply to non-bonded postgraduate scholarships awarded by universities and private enterprise. The section 23 (z) exemption does not apply, of course, to the remuneration that some employers continue to pay to employees while pursuing a full-time postgraduate course of study.

The question of which scholarships awards, etc. should be included in the section 23 (z) exemption and which should be excluded from the exemption was reviewed during the 1979-80 Budget deliberations. The Government decided, however, that there should be no change to the present position.

Technological Change (Question No. 4976)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Productivity, upon notice, on 23 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is he able to state which countries have passed legislation that requires (a) consultation between industry/employers and employees/employee organisations and (b) examination of social impact, especially on employment levels, before new technology, especially labour-displacing technology, is introduced.
  2. Has Australia any comparable legislation; if not, why not.
Mr Macphee:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) (a) The following countries are understood to have passed legislation which requires consultation between industry /employers and employee/employer organisations:

Sweden, Norway, Denmark, West Germany, Yugoslavia, France, Holland, Spain, Poland, Bangladesh, India, Korea, Nepal, Pakistan.

  1. There are no known instances of legislation having been enacted which makes the introduction of new technology conditional upon a social impact study having been undertaken before its actual introduction.

Legislation does exist in most EEC countries which requires unions to be notified of the likely employment effect of proposed redundancies. For example, in West Germany, when redundancies are seen to be inevitable the parties concerned are required to draw up appropriate social plans.

France has recently introduced legislation (to be implemented in a number of stages) requiring employers with at least 300 employees to produce annual ‘Social Balance Sheets’ which are to include information on employment

In Sweden the provisions of the 1977 ‘Joint Regulation in Working Life Act’ which provides employees with substantial influence over the organisation of work and the management of company affairs, including rights to information disclosure, could result in specific collective agreements which, inter alia, might include requirements for such social impact studies.

  1. 2 ) Australia does not have any comparable legislation.

The Government strongly supports the principle and practice of effective consultation and communication between employers and employees. The Government’s policy on employee participation commits it to encourage the implementation and demonstrate the value of this approach. My Department for example, has used the tripartite approach extensively in its productivity improvement programs.

The Government also recognised the critical importance of due consideration being given to the social consequences of technological change, before its actual introduction. It believes that employees and their representatives should be party to such proposals at the earliest possible stage in order to ensure that any disruptive effects are kept to a minimum.

Crown Copyright (Question No. 4979)

Mr Hodgman:

asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 23 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is it a fact that all judgments, opinions and official memoranda of Federal Judges are subject to Crown copyright?
  2. Are heavy penalties provided for persons guilty of serious breaches of Crown copyright, and in particular persons who use Crown copyright material in the Parliament without acknowledging the source and without first having obtained the consent of the Judge whose material has been plagiarised?
Mr Viner:
LP

-The Attorney-General has supplied the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. and (2)- The questions involve matters of legal opinion which depend for their answer upon the circumstances relating to the judgments, opinions and official memoranda referred to and the way in which, in any particular instance, they may have been brought into existence.

Bankruptcy Statistics (Question No. 4981)

Mr John Brown:
PARRAMATTA, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 23 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many bankruptcies were registered in (a) each city, (b) each major provincial town and (c) each country area in Australia in each year from 1969 and during the period from 1 January to 23 October 1979.
  2. In respect of the bankruptcies registered during the same years and period, in how many cases was the estimated shortfall of assets as against liabilities (a) less than $10,000, (b) between $10,000 and $20,000, (c) between $20,000 and $30,000, (d) between $50,000 and $100,000, (e) between $ 100,000 and $230,000, (f) between $250,000 and $500,000 and (g) in excess of $500,000.
Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Bankruptcy statistics are recorded on a financial year basis in each Bankruptcy District The Bankruptcy Districts of Australia coincide with the States and internal Territories, with the following exceptions:

    1. The State of New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory constitute only one Bankruptcy District;
    2. b ) The State of Queensland comprises three Bankruptcy Districts:

Southern Queensland

Central Queensland

Northern Queensland.

Statistics on the incidence of bankruptcies on a District by District basis for the years 1 969-70 to 1 978-79 inclusive were recently provided in answer to a question from Mr Humphreys (Question No. 4660). The answer was circulated on 25 October 1979.

The number of bankruptcies in Australia for the period 1 January 1979 to 31 October 1979 was 3,853, as follows:

Within each District, separate statistics are not maintained on the incidence of bankruptcies in (a) each city, (b) each major provincial town, or (c) each country area. However for the financial years 1977-78 and 1978-79 statistics were extracted on the geographical distribution of bankruptcies on a State capitals and suburbs-State country and regional basis. The statistics for 1977-78 were set out in Schedule 2- Part B of the 1 1th Annual Report on the Operation of the Bankruptcy Act 1966, which was tabled in Parliament on 22 November 1978. The statistics for 1978-79 are set out in Schedule 2-Part B of the 12th Annual Report, which was tabled on 21 November 1979.

  1. Statistics are unavailable on the estimated shortfall of assets as against liabilities in the categories (a) to (f) as set out in part 2 of the honourable member’s question. Statistics on the overall shortfalls for the years 1969-70 to 1978-79 are as follows:

Petroleum Retailing Industry (Question No. 4984)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 24 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Did he state on 22 February 1979 that the Government would legislate to outlaw discrimination in the petroleum retailing industry; if so, is this still intended.
  2. If legislation is not to be introduced, was this reversal brought about by pressure from the oil companies.
  3. Are oil companies increasingly squeezing out traditional dealers to establish self-service petrol stations over which the companies have even greater control; if so, is there an urgent need for the legislation.
  4. Can he say how many petrol stations have been (a) closed, (b) opened and (c) converted to self-service operation, in each State during each of the last 5 years.
  5. With reference to his answer to part (4) of question No. 3885 (Hansard, 11 September 1979, page 977) what aspects of the Government’s petrol retail industry proposals had not been considered by that date.
Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 indicated on 22 February 1979 that the Government was anxious to reach a decision as soon as possible on the package of proposals relating to the petroleum retail marketing industry which I announced in October 1978. The package contains a proposal to prohibit an oil company from discriminating in price between its lessee or licensee dealers, except where such discrimination is cost justified or is engaged in to meet competition from a competitor of the oil company.
  2. The Government decided, on 23 October 1 979, to prepare draft franchising legislation for the industry. The proposal for a franchising law, which arose from the package, is intended to ensure equitable treatment for lessee and licensee dealers.

The Government also decided to ask the Trade Practices Commission to monitor and report on the extent of price discrimination in the industry. The decision to request a report on price discrimination recognises changes which have occurred in the market situation since my announcement of the proposals. A decision on the proposals relating to price discrimination and the prohibition of oil companies from engaging in retailing petroleum has been deferred until after the Government nas had an opportunity to consider the report of the Trade Practices Commission on price discrimination and public comments on the draft franchising bill.

  1. See (2) above.
  2. No.
  3. The proposals raised many complex issues requiring thorough consideration. At the date referred to views and comments on all the proposals were still being considered.

Australian Fishing Zone (Question No. 4986)

Mr Cohen:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 24 October 1979:

What is the estimated cost of managing the Australian fishing zone in 1979-80 and how much of this will be recovered in the form of fishing fees from other countries.

Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answers to the honourable member’s questions are as follows:

It is not possible to identify readily the salary and other costs of staff involved in the management of the Australian fishing zone. However, a total of $900,000 has been appropriated to the Department of Primary Industry for the management of the zone in 1 979-80 for specific items such as reimbursement to the States for observer functions on foreign fishing vessels, apprehension and prosecution of foreign fishing vessels, computer services, as well as incidental expenditure covering log books, surveillance manuals, licence forms and manne charts.

In respect of the above appropriations it should be noted that the determination of future estimates of management related expenditure in the Australian fishing zone will be based on practical experience gained in the first year of operation of the zone.

It should also be understood that surveillance of the Australian fishing zone is provided by primary and secondary units which are also engaged in covering the requirements of a number of other departments. These surveillance efforts are co-ordinated through the Australian Coastal Surveillance Centre, within the Depanment of Transport. It is not possible to apportion surveillance costs to any one department or to any specific incident, in this case the detection of illegal operations by foreign fishing vessels.

It is estimated that$3.3m wilt be paid by foreign fishing nations in the form of fishing fees (including statutory licence fees) in 1979-80.

Canberra Airport Parking Areas (Question No. 4991)

Mr Fry:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 24 October 1 979:

  1. How is space allocated to hire cars at Canberra Airport.
  2. How many places are allocated (a) to each hire car company, (b) to taxis and (c) to the public.
  3. Will he allocate the most convenient parking areas to the public and the least convenient to hire car operators.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Reserved parking space at Canberra Airport is allocated to the various forms of vehicle transport by my Department ‘s airport planners in the tight of the day to day experience of airport management. Limited accommodation has been provided for hire cars so that this type of activity can provide an effective service.

  2. (a) A total of four places is reserved for hire cars without any reservations for any particular companies.

    1. Taxi ranks adequate to accommodate 13 taxis are provided along the terminal building access road.
    2. There is a total of 452 places in the airport public car parks being 172 limited time places near the terminal, and 280 places in the long stay area.

In addition, a total of 49 places is allocated to Commonwealth passenger vehicles, diplomatic corps, authorised car rental companies and incapacitated drivers.

  1. My Department does aim to provide convenient facilities for all public use and at the same time permit the efficient operation of passenger and vehicular movement. Certainly my Department would not deliberately disadvantage a particular class of legitimate user.

Public Servants’ Tour of Mining Areas (Question No. 4993)

Mr West:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 24 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is it a fact that a group of public servants was conducted recently on a 7 day tour of mining areas in Northern Australia, including Fraser Island, by the Australian Mining Industry Council.
  2. 2 ) If so, was the tour paid for by the Council.
  3. What are the names and designations of the officers who were conducted on the tour.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. Transport and some accommodation was provided by the Council.
  3. Mr E. M. Anderson, Assistant Secretary, Impact Assessment No. 1 Branch, Department of Science and the Environment.

Mr L. F. Backen, First Assistant Secretary, Oil and Gas Division, Department of National Development.

Mr K. F. Brigden, Second Commissioner of Taxation, Australian Taxation Office.

Mr I. Castles, O.B.E., Secretary, Department of Finance.

Mr D. J. Fraser, First Assistant Secretary, Industry Division 3, Department of Industry and Commerce.

Mr K. W. Popple, Assistant Secretary, Revenue, Loans and Investment Division, Department of the Treasury.

Mr E. M. W. Visbord, Deputy Secretary, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Mr J. M. Wilcox, Principal Adviser, Commodities No. 2 Division, Department of Trade and Resources.

Mr L. W. Williams, Acting Director, Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics.

Christmas Island Stamps (Question No. 4998)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice, on 24 October 1979:

  1. With respect to the current release of 16 stamps for Christmas Island in the Famous Visitors series, who (a) designed the stamps, (b) wrote the captions identifying the famous visitors and (c) checked the captions for accuracy.
  2. Does the caption for the5 cent stamp read ‘Admiral Pelham Aldrich, R.N., C.R.V.O.’; if so, what do the initials C.R.V.O. mean.
  3. Is it thought that the initials C.R.V.O. stand for Commander of the Royal Order; if so, is the correct abbreviation for that honour C.V.O.
  4. Why were the initials R.N. placed ahead of the other initials.
  5. 5 ) Does the caption for the 8c stamp read ‘Admiral of the Fleet Sir William Henry May, R.N., G.C.V.O., G.C.B.’; if so, is it a fact that the honour G.C.B. outranks G.C.V.O. and should have been printed first
  6. Why were the initials R.N. printed first.
  7. What is the point of listing the decorations, especially if they are incorrectly shown.
  8. Why does the Admiral of the Fleet in the 8 cent stamp wear a cap denoting inferior rank to the Admiral in the5c stamp.
Mr Ellicott:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I am informed by my Department that:

(a) The original rough designs were prepared by members of the Christmas Island Philatelic Advisory Committee (Christmas Island Administration). The artwork was prepared by Harrison’s, an English stamp printing firm commissioned by Crown Agent’s, London, who acted for the Christmas Island Administration in this issue.

b ) A member of the Christmas Island Philatelic Advisory Committee wrote the captions.

Crown Agents were asked specifically to ensure that all titles and academic qualifications used were correct and to arrange alterations with the printers, where necessary.

and (3) The initials were intended to stand for Commander of the Royal Victorian Order. The correct initials are C.V.O.

The initials R.N. were intended to identify the personage as a member of the Royal Navy. Their inclusion was not, however, formally correct

5 ) Yes, to both parts of the question.

See(4)above.

The decorations were included to show the distinguished careers of these men.

The Admiral of the Fleet on the 8c stamp, Sir William Henry May, was a Captain when he visited Christmas Island and was so depicted by the artist. Admiral Pelham Aldrich, whose portrait appears on the 5c stamp, was also a Captain when he visited Christmas Island. It is understood, however, that the last available portrait of him shows him in his Admiral’s uniform and this portrait was used for the stamp.

American Anti-Trust Litigation (Question No. 4999)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 25 October 1979:

  1. What is the total cost of the Government’s intervention through the United States Court of Appeals in the case brought by Westinghouse against Conzinc Riotinto of Australia Limited, Pancontinental Mining Limited, Mary Kathleen Uranium Limited, Queensland Mines Limited and other uranium rnining companies.
  2. Who has been briefed to act as solicitors for the Government in the case.
  3. Who will represent the Government in Court.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The Attorney-General has supplied the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. and (2) A firm of Washington Attorneys, Messrs Arent, Fox, Kintner, Plotkin and Kahn, has been retained by the Government for the purposes of protecting its interests in matters arising out of attempts to apply United States antitrust laws to conduct outside the United States. That firm has acted for the Government in this intervention.

An account from the firm in respect of the intervention has not yet been received but in response to inquiries made in the light of this question the firm has advised that an account will soon be rendered for the period 1 June to 31 October 1979. That account will be for professional fees of $US 10,476 and disbursements of SUS755.2 1. The firm is unable, having regard to the way in which its accounts have been kept, to apportion these amounts precisely between the intervention and the other related antitrust matters, but has commented that all except about $US2,000 would have been included directly in connection with the Court of Appeals proceedings.

  1. In accordance with the normal practice in such interventions in the United States a need is not expected to arise for any personal appearance before the Court, on behalf of the Government, to elaborate on the amicus curiae memorandum it has filed.

Radioactive Devices (Question No. 5000)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Science and the Environment, upon notice, on 25 October 1979:

  1. Has the Government investigated the adequacy of procedures relating to the use of radioactive devices such as the one which reportedly went astray from Western Mining Corporation’s Kambalda Mine.
  2. Since the Kambalda incident has the Government held any discussions with the States relating to the procedures governing the use of radioactive devices; if so, what action is proposed.
  3. Does the Minister propose to establish, in conjunction with the States, national codes of practice for the regulation of radioactive devices in industry.
  4. What legislation currently governs the use of these devices in (a) the Australian Capital Territory and (b) the Northern Territory.
  5. What are the penalties for failure to ensure compliance with these provisions.
Mr Groom:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is:

I take your question to refer to devices containing radioactive sources.

In the States the use of such radioactive devices is regulated through the relevant Radiation or Radioactive Substances Legislation. Procedures for the use of such devices have not been discussed in the consultative bodies established by the Commonwealth, the States and the Northern Territory in relation to the Environment Protection (Nuclear Codes) Act 1978 for which I am responsible and which provides for the development in consultation with the States of codes of practice relating to the health, safety and protection of the environment in the course of nuclear activities.

See(l) above.

See (1) above.

(a) I understand that a comprehensive radiation ordinance is being prepared for the Australian Capital Territory as a matter of priority.

Northern Territory Radiation (Safety Control) Ordinance 1978.

5 ) With respect to 4 ( b ) as set out in the Ordinance.

Energy Use in Buildings (Question No. 5001)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 25 October 1979:

  1. 1 ) What research is being sponsored or undertaken by his Department into means of improving the efficiency of energy use in buildings.
  2. What sum (a) was spent for these purposes during 1978-79 and (b) has been allocated for 1979-80.
  3. What specific action has been taken to improve the efficiency of energy use in existing and future Government buildings.
  4. Has his Department taken any steps to introduce or recommend new buildings regulations to promote energy conservation in buildings.
Mr Groom:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. My Department is undertaking investigations into the application and economics of solar power building cooling systems and is also assisting the Standards Association of Australia (SAA) with evaluation and test methods for solar hot water heaters.

In addition, the Australian Housing Research Council is investigating thermal efficiency and user characteristics of dwellings designed for low energy usage.

  1. Within my portfolio, funds are not specifically appropriated for research into means of improving the efficiency of energy use in buildings. However, sums for those purposes (a) spent in 1978-79 and (b) to be expended in 1979-80 by my Department and by bodies within my portfolio are as follows:

Department of Housing and Construction:

  1. approximately $100,000 was spent in 1978-79- expenditure on salaries, overheads and cash payments
  2. approximately $150,000 is to be expended in 1 979-80-‘in house ‘ salaries.

Australian Housing Research Council: funded equally by the Commonwealth and States to a total of $200,000 for each of the 1978-79 and 1979-80 financial years, from which totals

  1. $22,541 was spent in 1978-79 on investigating thermal efficiency and user characteristics of dwellings designed for low energy usage

  2. b ) $69,8 1 4 is committed for expenditure in 1 979-80.

    1. My Department’s policy over the past 30 years has been and continues to be to design energy and cost effective buildings (normal criterion for cost effectiveness is lowest total annual charges) and to provide advice and assistance to sponsors in the better formulation of their design briefs and in building management practices to achieve better use of money and energy.

Dwelling Design Guidelines have been prepared by my Department for the National Capital Development Commission (NCDC) for application to public housing in the ACT. These Guidelines have been used by the NCDC as the basis of a community publication providing information on low energy housing for housing consumers in the ACT.

  1. My Department has made a submission to the Senate Standing Committee on National Resources, recommending a review of statutory building regulations with a view to eliminating items that inhibit economics in energy use.

Building regulations are the responsibilities of the States. However, the Department is involved, in conjunction with the States, in the review of the Interstate Standing Committee on Uniform Building Regulations. One of the issues under consideration is the need to take into account regulatory processes and controls which affect the conservation of energy in housing and buildings.

Civil Aviation: First Aid and Medical Training (Question No. 5005)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 25 October 1 979:

  1. 1 ) What first aid and medical instruction and training is undertaken by air hostesses and stewards employed by Ansett Airlines, TAA, Qantas and comparable overseas airlines.
  2. What qualifications or certificates of competency are attained by hostesses and stewards employed by these airlines on completion of their training.
  3. Is the possession of the qualifications or certificates a prerequisite for service aboard each company’s aircraft.
  4. What specific procedures are followed by the airlines in the event of (a) a general medical emergency occurring, (b) a suspected heart attack and (c) imminent birth of a child.
  5. To what extent are cabin staff dependent upon fare paying passengers in the event of a medical emergency in flight.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: ( 1 ), (2), (3) and (4) Air Navigation Orders require only that cabin attendants shall be instructed in the location and use of first aid equipment and have a knowledge of the physiological effects of altitude, together with the use and location of oxygen equipment carried. The content of training syllabuses is delegated to the airlines concerned and is subject to only general supervision by my Department.

  1. As in other areas of public concentration, in a medical emergency in flight use is made of additional medical resources when available.

River Murray Waters Agreement (Question No. 5007)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 25 October 1 979:

  1. 1 ) What is the current standing of discussions between the Commonwealth and States to amend the River Murray Waters Agreement.
  2. Can he say when this legislation will be introduced.
  3. Has his attention been drawn to an address by Mr J. V. Seekamp to the 35th Annual Meeting of the Murray Valley Development League, when Mr Seekamp noted that pumps at the Lake Hawthorn project were installed by Victoria in 1968-69 with grant money provided by the Commonwealth Government but there is a reluctance to use them as Victoria has to meet the continuing pumping cost; if so, will he investigate this situation to ensure that increased powers are given to the River Murray Commission to overcome problems of this nature.
  4. Will he raise with the River Murray Commission the question of the effectiveness of dilution flows from Lake Victoria, as referred to by Mr Seekamp.
  5. Are the criticisms by Mr Seekamp of the operation of these salinity mitigation works justified; if not, why not.
Mr Newman:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. All four governments have now agreed that their Crown Law advisers should meet as soon as possible to prepare amendments to the River Murray Waters Agreement. I have written to the Attorney-General asking him to initiate the necessary action.
  2. No.
  3. Yes. I am advised that the current operation of the Lake Hawthorn project is in accordance with recommendations of the River Murray Working Party as set out in its report of September 1973. The scheme is operated to minimise operating costs and to optimise available evaporative capacity in the disposal basins by discharge to the River Murray at times of high flow and low salinity.

This is in accordance with strict operating procedures to ensure no harmful effects to downstream users. At present, the operation of such schemes both in Victoria and South Australia is carried out under informal co-operative arrangements with the River Murray Commission. Under the proposed amended River Murray Waters Agreement, I would expect that future operations would be formally integrated with a comprehensive water quality management plan for the river system.

  1. The River Murray Commission does have regard to policies which, while maximising the quantity of water stored in Lake Victoria, also has regard to water quality aspects of such supplies. Mr Seekamp’s suggestion that earlier winter flows should not be stored in anticipation of later inflows of lower saline content cannot be accepted. Obviously, it is not possible, without the benefit of hindsight, to establish procedures which will ensure maximum quantity together with minimum salinity levels.
  2. ) No, for reasons given above.

Health Insurance: Contributions (Question No. 5010)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 25 October 1979:

What were the total contributions collected by (a) medical and (b) hospital funds during each of the three months periods ending (i) 30 June 1978, (ii) 30 September 1978, (iii) 31 December 1978, (iv) 31 March 1979 and (v) 30 June 1979 or for any of these periods for which figures are available.

Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. The relevant information is not available on a quarterly basis for the registered medical funds. Under Section 76 (2 ) of the National Health Act, funds are required to submit financial accounts on an annual basis. Financial statements for medical funds for 1978-79 have not yet been submitted by all funds.
  2. Hospital fund contribution income data are collected by my Department on a quarterly basis as a by-product of the hospital benefits re-insurance arrangements. The hospital fund contribution income for the relevant quarters was as follows:

Public Service: Compilation of Political Material (Question No. 5012)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 25 October 1979:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to a letter, dated 8 October 1979, circulated to all members of his Ministry, from the Federal Director of the Liberal Party, Mr Tony Eggleton.
  2. ) Is it a fact that the letter seeks material from each Minister in preparation for the Liberal Party’s campaign for the next Federal election.
  3. Does the letter reflect his view accurately in saying that Ministers should give it a high priority.
  4. Have any Ministers referred this letter to their public service advisers and asked them to compile the material requested.
  5. 5 ) If so, how many Ministers have done so.
  6. Did he authorise this practice; if so, does he approve of public servants being asked to compile this type of party political propaganda.
  7. Have any public servants refused to do this work; if so, can he give an assurance that any refusals will not lead to victimisation of these public servants.
  8. Will he direct all Ministers to have this work performed by their personal staffs and not by professional public service advisors; if not, why not.
  9. How does he expect his requests for priority treatment to be regarded in the light of staff ceilings and budgetary cutbacks throughout the Public Service.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. Ministers were asked to check material prepared by the Liberal Party Secretariat
  3. ) The Liberal Party Secretariat was asked to give a high priority to the project
  4. to (9) I refer the honourable member to the Prime Minister’s remarks made in response to question No. 1593 (Hansard, 14 November 1978, p. 2790).

Hearing Aid Assistance (Question No. 5013)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 6 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Which State Governments, apart from the New South Wales Government, provide batteries and hearing aids to persons who are not pensioners but who are on low incomes and are ineligible to receive assistance from the Commonwealth.
  2. Did he made a commitment to the general aims of the 1979 Deafness Awareness Week; if so, will he broaden the terms of eligibility for hearing aid assistance from the Commonwealth in view of inequities which arise due to differing State provisions.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 understand that apart from the New South Wales Government, the only State Government which provides assistance with hearing aids and batteries to persons ineligible for assistance from the Commonwealth is the Victorian Government The assistance provided by the Victorian Government is subject to a means test as is the case with New South Wales.
  2. In the present economic circumstances the Government has decided that it is unable to extend the terms of eligibility for hearing aid assistance to additional categories.

Social Welfare Expenditure (Question No. 5014)

Mr MacKenzie:
CALARE, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 6 November 1979:

Is the Minister able to state what percentage of annual budget appropriations are committed to Social Security and welfare outlays by national governments in (a) the United States of America, (b) the United Kingdom, (c) Canada, (d) Australia, (e) New Zealand, (0 Sweden, (g) Denmark, (h) the Netherlands, (j) France, (k) West Germany and (1) Japan.

Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

While the information requested by the honourable member could be provided after a large amount of research it would not give a clear picture of relativities because of the significantly different government structures in the countries listed. To obtain the body of information which would be necessary to make valid comparisons between these countries would require a major research effort and I am not prepared to authorise the application of the necessary resources.

Income Tax Collections (Question No. 5016)

Mr Wilson:
STURT, SOUTH AUSTRALIA

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 6 November 1 979:

  1. 1 ) How much of the $73 1 m income tax due by individuals and outstanding as at 30 June 1979 was collected during September 1979.
  2. How much of the $223m income tax due by individuals and outstanding as at 1 April 1979 was collected during (a) July 1979, (b) August 1979 and (c) September 1979.
Mr Howard:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) Available statistics do not indicate how much income tax collected on assessments of individual taxpayers in the period 1 July to 30 September 1979 related to tax that was outstanding at 30 June 1 979 or was due for payment at 1 April 1979.

At 16 November 1979, however, tax owing by individual taxpayers and due for payment before 1 April 1979 amounted to $186m. Tax owing by individual taxpayers at the same date and due for payment between 1 April 1979 and 30 June 1979 amounted to $263m. Comparable figures as at 30 June 1979 were $223m and about $389m. Changes in the amount of tax owing at any date can be due to amendment of assessments and other miscellaneous factors as well as to payments.

Company Tax Collections (Question No. 5017)

Mr Wilson:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 6 November 1 979:

  1. 1 ) How much of the $294m income tax due by companies and outstanding as at 30 June 1979 was collected during September 1979.
  2. 2 ) How much of the $ 1 74m income tax due by companies and outstanding as at 1 April 1979 was collected during (a) July 1979, (b) August 1979 and (c) September 1979.
Mr Howard:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) Available statistics do not indicate how much of the income tax collected from companies in the period from 1 July 1979 to 30 September 1979 related to tax that was outstanding at 30 June 1 979 or was due for payment at 1 April 1979.

At 16 November 1979, however, tax owing by companies and due for payment before 1 April 1979 amounted to $165m. Tax owing by companies at the same date and due for payment between 1 April 1979 and 30 June 1979 amounted to $ 1 75m. Comparable figures as at 30 June 1 979 were $ 1 74m and about $85m. Changes in the amount of tax owing at any date can be due to amendment of assessments and other miscellaneous factors as well as to payments.

Work Experience Programs (Question No. 5018)

Mr Barry Jones:
LALOR, VICTORIA · ALP

asked the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 6 November 1979:

  1. In view of the Government’s expressed support of work experience programs for young persons, is it possible to arrange work experience attachments of young persons to Commonwealth Departments.
  2. If such a scheme has not been considered, will he arrange for it to be considered.
  3. If such a scheme has been considered, is the problem of compensation for injury of attachees one of the reasons for the scheme not having been implemented.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2): The Government is currently examining the question of secondary school students being able to participate in work experience programs in Commonwealth Departments.
  2. The need to devise an effective system of compensation for injuries incurred by school students is one of the problems which is being addressed.

Radioactive Waste (Question No. 5019)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 6 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) What was the reason for encasing in concrete the containers of radioactive waste which were repatriated to Britain.
  2. Were there hazardous quantities of any radio-active materials other than plutonium in any of the containers.
Mr Newman:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. The British Government stipulated the method of packaging and transport and supervised the packaging of the material to conform with its requirements for repatriation.
  2. No.

Money Supply (Question No. 5029)

Mr Willis:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 6 November 1979:

  1. What are the ‘wider measures of the volume of money’ mentioned on page 30 of Statement 2 of the Budget papers.
  2. What have been the aggregate levels of money supply shown by these wider measures each month since June 1 975 to date.
  3. What have been the annual rates of growth of these wider measures each year since 1975-76.
Mr Howard:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: (1), (2) and (3) There are no published data relating to broader measures of the volume of money than M3; data on M3 are published in the Statistical Bulletin of the Reserve Bank. However, broader measures may be constructed by adding to M3 selected liabilities of financial institutions other than banks. For example, one wider measure of the volume of money may be constructed by adding to M3 the withdrawable funds of permanent building societies. Data for the withdrawable funds of permanent building societies are available from the ABS publication, Housing Finance for Owner Occupation- Permanent Building Societies, Australia (Catalogue No. 5610.0). Another, even wider measure, could be constructed by adding (some of) the liabilities of finance companies. The choice and use of particular measures depends very much on the purpose of the analysis.

Social Security Appeals: Legal Aid (Question No. 5034)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is it a fact as suggested by representatives of the Attorney-General’s Department to the Law Council of Australia on 9 October 1979, that regardless of any suggestions which the Administrative Review Council may make, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal is to be given certain decisions of the Director-General of Social Security which are adverse to claimants for social security benefits.
  2. If so, is any provision being made for the granting of legal aid in these cases before the Tribunal.
  3. Is there any provision for legal aid in any other cases (e.g. appeals against deportation orders) before the Tribunal.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. As previously indicated the Government proposes to vest in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal jurisdiction to review decisions of the Director-General of Social Security that do not accord with a Social Security Appeals Tribunal’s recommendation. In its Third Annual Report tabled in Parliament on 6 November 1979, the Administrative Review Council recommended that, subject to provision of adequate accommodation and staffing, the jurisdiction should be vested as soon as possible. The Council is currently examining the social security appeals system and any recommendations it makes will be considered by the Government in due course.
  2. and (3) Provision has been made in section 69 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 for the AttorneyGeneral, in the circumstances mentioned in the section, to authorize the provision of legal or financial assistance to a person who is, or proposes to be, a party to a proceeding before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Section 69 would be applicable in social security cases and also in other classes of cases in which the Tribunal has jurisdiction.

Commonwealth Bank: Employment Provisions (Question No. 5040)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

Are there weight limits for employment with the Commonwealth Bank; if so, are these limits so rigidly applied as to exclude from employment a person otherwise suitable for a position.

Mr Howard:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

The Managing Director of the Commonwealth Banking Corporation has advised that one of the requirements governing appointment to service in the Corporation under the Commonwealth Banks Act 1959 is that the Corporation be satisfied regarding the applicant’s health and physical fitness.

Subject to some flexibility the Corporation’s medical requirements are closely allied to the general medical standard as set out in the Handbook for Commonwealth Medical

Officers issued by the Commonwealth Department of Health.

Weight scales are detailed and the general medical standard is met where the variation from the scale does not exceed:

in males- 15 per cent below or 25 per cent above; and

in females- 20 per cent below or 25 per cent above.

Where the applicant is outside these limits, special consideration is afforded individual cases. Generally speaking, however, the Corporation, on medical advice, prefers that the weight be adjusted to within the limits before an offer of employment is made.

Tobacco Advertising (Question No. 5041)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

Is it a fact, as estimated by the Senate Standing Committee on Social Welfare in its report on Drug Problems in Australia, that in the 6 years prior to 1 979 the tobacco industry in Australia spent close to $ 100m on advertising whereas expenditure on anti-smoking campaigns over the same period was of the order of $ 1.5m.

Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

The Senate Standing Committee’s Report entitled ‘Drug Problems in Australia- an Intoxicated Society?’ referred to said that the tobacco industry has probably spent close to $ 100m on advertising in the last six years whereas total Commonwealth expenditure on anti-smoking campaigns over the same period has been $ 1 .5m ‘.

As the report was printed in October 1977, the period to which I assume the honourable member is referring is the six year period prior to 1977. In three years of this period, 1972-73-1974-75, an amount of $ 1.5m was spent by the Commonwealth in the National Warning Against Smoking Campaign.

It is not possible to provide details of total expenditure by the Government to discourage smoking as the Commonwealth supports, or has supported through other funding mechanisms, a wide variety of health education activities carried out in hospitals, health centres and other health agencies. These programs aim to promote healthy lifestyles and include anti-smoking as a major part of the overall programs.

Apart from Commonwealth financial outlays, the honourable member will be aware that, as a significant antismoking measure, the Government prohibited, as from I September 1976, the advertising of cigarettes and cigarette tobacco on radio and television.

Tourist Visas (Question No. 5045)

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

How many applicants for tourist visas from (a) Greece, (b) Italy, (c) Turkey, (d) Cyprus, (e) the United Kingdom and (0 the United States of America were refused entry to Australia without being personally interviewed by Australian authorities during (i) 1975, (ii) 1976, (iii) 1977, (iv) 1 978 and (v) 1 979 to date.

Mr Mackellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

Precise statistics of this kind are not maintained by my Department. However the following statistics on the total number of visitor applications refused in (a) Greece, (b) Italy, (c) Turkey, (d) United Kingdom, (e) United States of America for the period 1 January 1975 to 30 September 1979 and for (f) Cyprus for the period 1 January 1978 to 30 September 1979 may be of assistance. Detailed statistics are not available for Cyprus for the years 1975, 1976 and 1977. (It should be noted that the figures are for applications which in a small proportion of cases include more than one person.)

Schools Commission Grants (Question No. 5048)

Mr Neil:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) What grants were provided by or on the recommendation of the Schools Commission to schools in the Electoral Division of St George during (a) 1976-77, (b) 1977-78 and (c) 1978-79.
  2. Which schools received the grants.
  3. 3 ) What was the value of the grants.
  4. For what purposes were the grants given.
Mr Staley:
LP

-The Minister for Education has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1) to (4) Funds for non-government schools in the electorate of St George made available under the General Recurrent Grants and Capital Grants Programs administered by the Schools Commission in 1978 and 1979 are set out in the schedule below. Grants are made available on a calendar year basis and information is provided in this way. Payments for the years 1 976-77 are set out in reports which were tabled in the Senate on the dates listed below:

Report-States Grants (Schools) Act 1972- Financial Assistance granted to each State in 1975-76-2 November 1977.

Report- States Grants (Schools) Act 1972- Financial Assistance granted to each State in 1976-77-23 February 1978.

Report- States Grants (Schools) Act 1973- Financial Assistance granted to each State in 1 976- 25 August 1 977.

Report-States Grants (Schools) Act 1976- Financial Assistance granted to each State- 23 February 1978.

Report- States Grants (Schools Assistance) Act 1976-24 November 1978.

It is not possible to provide information in respect of payments to individual government schools except in relation to grants made under the Special Projects (Innovations) Program of the Commission. Hurstville Boys High School received a grant of $827 under this program in 1979 for a remedial reading program.

The Commonwealth Government, through Commission programs, provides bulk funding to the New South Wales Government for government school programs to disburse as it sees fit. The following funds have been allocated to government schools in New South Wales through Commission programs in 1978 and 1979:

The following non-government schools in the electorate of St George received grants under the Migrant Education Program in 1978. Information in respect of 1979 is not yet available.

Economic Aspects of Uranium Mining (Question No. 5050)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

Has his attention been drawn to comments of the Australian Mining Industry Council that due to a sharp decline in world demand for uranium and the discovery of major uranium reserves abroad, the estimates of the volume and price of uranium sales contained in the Fox Report are a serious over-estimation of the current probabilities; if so, and in view of the major uncertainties in the uranium market and the unresolved questions concerning the impact of uranium mining on the Australian economy, will he formulate a paper on the economic aspects of uranium mining for debate by the House.

Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I am aware of various views, both from within Australia and from overseas, on the market outlook for uranium in the short and long term. The Australian uranium industry has a dynamic growth potential and undoubtedly has a very important role in supplying essential base loads for electricity generation in many countries. Earlier this month the first contracts since December 1972 were signed providing for the export of 2,500 short tons of uranium concentrates over the period 1983 to 1992. These contracts are worth, at present day prices, a total of some $A 1 60m to $A 1 80m.

Motor Vehicle Manufacture (Question No. 5052)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 7 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has Chrysler, Australian Motor Industries and Nissan failed to meet their obligations under the 85 per cent local content rule; if so, has this failure caused local component manufacturers lost business worth an estimated $25m and caused approximately 1,600 job losses in manufacturer and supplier industries.
  2. Is it a fact that any or all of these companies were liable to fines for previous failures to meet these rules.
  3. What fines have been imposed for past failures.
  4. What is the maximum and minimum amounts which these companies can be fined for current failures.
Mr Fife:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. The Motor Vehicle Manfacturing Plan requires companies to meet local content commitments on an annual basis. Figures published by the Department of Business and Consumer Affairs for the first six months of 1979 indicate that Chrysler, AMI and Nissan may need to improve content performance if they are to meet their 1979 commitments. I understand the three companies have sourcing arrangements in train with local component suppliers which should result in significant increases in their local content situation. The claimed loss in business and employment opportunities can, therefore, only be hypothetical at this stage. The local component industry received considerable additional business in the period 1977-1979 as a result of the need to increase physical local content following an increase in the value of the imported components as a result of appreciation of the Japanese Yen.
  2. In 1978 Chrysler’s Plan by-law entitlement was reduced in accordance with relevant provisions of the Plan on account of the company’s failure to meet Plan commitments. This has been the only occasion, in the current Plan, that any company’s by-law allowance has been reduced.
  3. The so-called ‘fines’ or ‘penalties’ are in fact a reduction in a companys Plan by-law entitlement. When a company fails to meet its local content commitment its normal by-law allowance is reduced in proportion to its shortfall in content. As a consequence, the company must pay duty at substantive rates on some part of its Plan imports. The precise extent of any reduction in by-law entitlement is considered to be confidential commercial information.
  4. There is no prescribed minimum reduction. The maximum reduction is complete withdrawal of Plan by-law entitlement.

Japanese Fishing Vessels in Australian Fishing Zone (Question No. 5057)

Mr Cohen:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 8 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many inspectors does his Department have who will be able to board Japanese long-line fishing vessels in the Australian Fishing Zone to monitor their catch and fishing methods.
  2. Where are these inspectors stationed throughout Australia.
  3. 3 ) How long will they stay on board the fishing vessels.
  4. Does his Department cover the costs of these inspections.
  5. Are records of catches by long-line fishermen supplied to his Department every 6 days.
  6. How are these figures broken down, i.e. according to species, weight, size class, area of catch, catch per effort, fish kept and fish discarded.
  7. Have samples of black marlin caught by Japanese fishermen in the Australian Fishing Zone been tested for levels of mercury present in the marlin flesh; if not, will this be done.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Under an arrangement with the State Governments fisheries inspectors employed by the States undertake functions on the Commonwealth’s behalf. States are reimbursed for the actual costs of this work. In the 1979-80 financial year $511 ,000 has been allocated to allow the States to employ an additional 26 observers to monitor foreign fishing activity in the Australian fishing zone. Additionally the Commonwealth directly employs five fisheries inspectors at the Northern Fisheries Unit which is based at Cairns with an additional inspector at Darwin.
  2. The officers referred to in ( 1 ) are now or are likely to be located in Cairns, Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Hobart, Adelaide, Perth and Darwin.
  3. It is not expected that observers would spend more than 24 hours aboard an individual longliner at any one time.
  4. Yes.
  5. Yes. In addition fishing logbooks must be maintained and returned to the department after the conclusion of the fishing voyage.

  6. Every sixth day each boat reports:

    1. total longline catch by number and weight of fish.
    2. catch by number and weight of; albacore, bigeye tuna, black marlin, southern bluefin tuna, yellowfin tuna. Catch data is to include fish discarded.
    3. total number of hooks set during the six day period. Additional information is contained in the logbooks including size of vessel, type of operation, bait used, position, daily effort and catch by species.
  7. Samples of black marlin flesh caught by Japanese fishermen in the Australian fishing zone have not been tested for mercury levels by Australian authorities. At the present time it is not intended that this be done. However New South Wales authorities have tested mercury levels in black marlin caught by Australians in the Coral Sea.

Payments for Use of Airport Facilities (Question No. 5061)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 19 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) What sums were paid into Commonwealth revenue by (a) Qantas Airways Ltd, (b) Trans Australia Airlines, (c) Ansett Airlines, and (d) East West Airlines for use of airport facilities at (i) Sydney, (ii) Melbourne, and (iii) all other Australian airports during each year from 1970-71 to 1978-79.
  2. What proportion of (a) airline operating costs, (b) total airline costs, and (c) passenger revenue did this expenditure by each airline represent in each of the same years.
  3. What Commonwealth expense was incurred per paying passenger in relation to each airline for use of airport facilities at (a) Sydney, (b) Melbourne, and (c) all other Australian airports during each year from 1970-71 to 1978-79.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) As indicated in my replies to Questions Nos. 4159 and 4160, the major revenues received by the Commonwealth in respect of the operation of the airways system including airports, airways facilities, meteorological costs etc stem from air navigation charges and fuel tax. Air navigation charges are levied on a route or annual charge basis and are not allocated to individual airports or facilities. Similarly, the estimates of fuel tax are not allocated to individual airports nor are they allocated to individual airlines.

The only revenues which are specifically identified with individual airports are those relating to business concessions at airports, site and building rentals, car parking and a number of other miscellaneous charges. Moreover, only some of these revenues are received directly from the airlines mentioned in the question.

In these circumstances it is not possible to answer parts ( 1 ) and (2 ) of the honourable member’s question.

  1. As indicated in my reply to Question No. 4159, the Department’s accounting system records capital, maintenance, operating and administrative costs under a wide range of functional headings for each location.

The Department’s accounting system, however, does not allocate these costs at locations to particular airlines.

Ansett Airlines of Australia: F28 Aircraft (Question Na 5062)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 13 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has Ansett Airlines or its subsidiaries sought approval to import F28 aircraft; if so (a) how many aircraft has each company sought to import, (b) on what routes are the aircraft proposed to be operated, (c) when was the import approval application lodged and (d) when is it proposed to import each of the aircraft.
  2. Has he granted approval to import the aircraft; if not, when does he expect to make a decision on the application.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Mac. Robertson Miller Airlines Service, an Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd operating division, currently has five F28 aircraft in its fleet The aircraft are presently operated on intrastate Western Australian services and on regular services to Darwin.

No application to import further F28 aircraft is currently held by my Department

  1. Yes. Approvals to import these aircraft were given at various times between 1969 and 1971.

Air Navigation Charges (Question No. 5064)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 3 November 1 979:

  1. 1 ) What sum was paid in Australia by (a) Qantas Airways Ltd. (b) Trans Australia Airlines, (c) East West Airlines and (d) Ansett Airlines for air navigation charges during each year from 1 974-75 to 1 978-79 and the period 1 July 1979 to date.
  2. What proportion of (a) operating costs, (b) total costs and (c) passenger and freight revenue attributable to Australian operations did this expenditure represent for each airline in each of the years and the period referred to in part ( 1 ).
  3. What was the amount of this expenditure on a per passenger embarked in Australia basis in each year and period referred to in part ( 1 ) for each airline.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The following air navigation charges figures have been derived from Departmental records and reflect the airlines financial years of 1 July to 30 June, with the exception of QANTAS which has a financial year 1 April to 3 1 March.

For the year 1 979-80 the periods in question are-

  1. TAA-1/7-14.9.79; (b) EWA- 1/7-3 1.8.79; (c) Ansett- 1/7-29.9.79; (d ) Qantas- 1 /4- 1 3. 10.79.

The Ansett figures cover all airline operations of the Ansett group.

  1. ) The following tables set out the percentages requested. The calculations have been based on the above figures and data derived from the published reports of the airlines with the exception of Ansett. In this instance the figures were derived from the Ansett report which I tabled in Parliament.

Figures for period from 1 July 1 979 not available.

In respect to Table (a) Qantas changed its method of recording various cost items so that a separate operating cost figure could no longer be obtained for the 77-78 and 78-79 years.

  1. 3 ) Amount per Passenger Embarked in Australia ($)-

Airline Fuel Costs (Question No. 5066)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 13 November 1 979:

  1. 1 ) What were the fuel costs of (a) Qantas Airways Ltd., (b) Ansett Airlines, (c) Trans Australia Airlines and (d) East West Airlines during each year from 1970-71 to 1978-79 and the period 1 July 1979 to date.
  2. What percentage of (a) operating costs, (b) total costs and (c) passenger and freight revenue did this expenditure represent for each airline in each of the years and period referred to in Part ( 1 ).
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The following table sets out details of fuel costs as requested. The information has been obtained from the annual reports of the airlines except in the case of Ansett where the data has been extracted from the financial reports tabled in Parliament.

The figures relate to the financial years of the airlines which is the normal fiscal year except for Qantas. The Qantas year is from 1 April to 3 1 March.

The figures for Ansett cover all airline operations of the Ansett group and also includes materials used, services rendered and purchased and accommodation expenses. A separate figure for fuel is not available from published information.

Information for period I July 1979 to date is not yet available.

  1. The following table sets out percentage figures requested. No percentage figures are shown for Ansett as indicated above a separate fuel figure is not available.

HMAS Diamantina: Signing-off Ceremony (Question No. 5071)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 13 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has he been approached with a request for assistance to members of the original crew for attendance at a signing-off ceremony of HMAS Diamantina.
  2. 2 ) Is any ceremony proposed.
  3. If a ceremony is to take place will merr’ original crew be invited; if so, under what conditio
Mr Killen:
LP

– The answer to the horn member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. Yes.
  3. Yes- those who can be contacted. They will need pay their own expenses to attend the ceremony.

Defence Force: Drug and Alcohol Addiction (Question No. 5073)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 13 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Did he advise Senator Button in answer to Senate Question No. 1560 (Senate Hansard, 8 June 1979, page 30 14) that statistics of drug and alcohol addiction in the Defence Forces are not maintained.
  2. Were official statistics actually provided to a journalist for an article in Playboy Magazine on 2 1 September 1979; if so, was the answer given to the Senate correct.
  3. Is it a fact that the statistics were prepared for the answer to a Parliamentary Question but not included in the answer to the Senator?
Mr Killen:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. No. Senator Button was advised that there were no detailed statistics on the incidence of alcoholism and drug addiction detected by Medical Officers in any of the Services.
  2. Yes. Statistics were provided to a journalist for an article in Playboy magazine. Those statistics were not statistics on drug addiction. Members of the Defence Force may be discharged for drug offences falling well short of addiction.

Essentially, the statistics provided were statistics relating to the number of investigations into alleged drug offences for the period 1975-77 in all three Services, and the number of discharges resulting from these investigations or of discharges where drug abuse was a contributing factor.

  1. 3 ) No, the statistics were not prepared for a possible reply to the Parliamentary question alluded to. They were either extracted from or comprised updates of data made available by the Depanment of Defence during a public hearing of the Williams Royal Commission nearly two years ago, or else were drawn from related data. Those of currency in December 1977, comprise Exhibit 129 of the proceedings of the Royal Commission. The record of evidence given by the Department has for some considerable time been in the Parliamentary Library and it will be seen that the statistics are not confidential and were tendered as a public document. They were reviewed at the time the Senator’s question was being examined, but neigher they nor any other data available would have enabled the Senator to be answered on a comprehensive basis consistent with the terms of his question. One reason for this will be apparent from (2) above. Another was that discharges have occurred when drug or alcohol abuse was a contributing but not necessarily the determining factor; a third was that in many instances the drug offence most certainly could not be described in terms f addiction: in some instances, discharge has followed imediately upon a first known occurrence of ‘hard’ drug

Dextrose Monohydrate (Question No. 5078)

Mr Lionel Bowen:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 14 November i979:

  1. 1 ) What is the rate of duty on dextrose monohydrate.
  2. Will there be any reduction in duty in the 3 months ending 3 1 January 1980.
  3. In respect of dextrose monohydrate imported from China, what is the current domestic value in China and how is it determined.
  4. Has his attention been drawn to his Department’s Dumping Report No. 17, 1979, which says on page 9 that a normal value of RMB669 per tonne has been assessed; if so, how was this assessed and what does normal value mean.
Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Dextrose monohydrate is classifiable within subparagraph 17.02.21 1 of the Customs Tariff. At the time the question was asked the rates of duty applicable were:

General tariff rate- 20 per cent; Preferential tariff rate- 20 per cent; Developing country tariff rate- 20 per cent less $ 10 per tonne.

  1. The above duty rates reduced on 23 November 1979 to:

General tariff rate- 10 per cent; Preferential tariff rate- 10 per cent; Developing Country Tariff rate- 10 per cent less $ 10 per tonne.

  1. Since 1 July 1976, Australia’s Customs Valuation System has been based on the internationally recognised Brussels Convention Definition of Value. Current Domestic Value is no longer a consideration in the Customs Valuation of goods.

  2. The normal value was assessed under sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the Customs Tariff (Anti-Dumping) Act 1 975. This sub-section enables the use of a third country ‘normal value ‘ where the Government of the country of export:

    1. has a monopoly, or substantial monopoly, of the trade of the country; or
    2. determines or substantially influences the domestic price of goods in that country.

Malaysia was the third country specified in this case. The normal value assessed for dextrose monohydrate in Malaysia (converted at the appropriate rates of exchange at the date of assessment) was applied to exports of this product from the People ‘s Republic of China.

Normal value of the goods under sub-section 5 (3) is the price of like goods produced or manufactured and sold in the ordinary course of trade in another country specified by the Minister, being a country in which, in the opinion of the Minister, the costs of production or manufacture are similar to those in the country of export

Pakistan: Centrifuge Enrichment Facility (Question No. 5080)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

  1. 1) Is he able to state whether US Assistant Secretary of State, Thomas R. Pickering, said in a statement in May 1979 that Pakistan had been covertly purchasing components and materials for a centrifuge enrichment facility for several years.
  2. ) If so, has he had these allegations investigated and was there any evidence found to support them or to confirm the possibility that they might be correct.
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. The Government had evidence prior to May 1979 which accorded with Mr Pickering’s statement

Laser Isotope Separation Facilities (Question No. 5081)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

  1. Does the Nuclear Suppliers Group Trigger List specifically include laser isotope separation facilities.
  2. If not, does this mean that as far as the Nuclear Suppliers Group is concerned, transfer of laser isotope separation facilities, and critical components thereof, will not necessarily be covered by International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards.
  3. Why have laser isotope separation facilities not been included on the Trigger List.
  4. Which countries are currently engaged in laser isotope separation research and development.
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. No.
  2. The guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group require suppliers to exercise restraint in the transfer of sensitive technologies, such as enrichment plants, equipment or technology. They also require International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards to be applied to equipment, other than analytical instruments, especially designed or prepared for the separation of isotopes of uranium which is transferred. If such sensitive technologies are transferred, suppliers are also required to encourage recipients to accept supplier involvement and /or other appropriate multinational participation in facilities. The detailed obligations of suppliers concerning any transfer to a non-nuclear-weapon state of enrichment technology are set out in IAEA document INFCIRC/254. I believe that it would be fully consistent with the objectives of the guidelines to interpret those applying to the transfer of equipment and associated technology especially designed or prepared for the separation of isotopes of uranium, as including laser isotope separation.
  3. Laser isotope separation facilities were not specifically included on the trigger list because, at the time that it was compiled enrichment of uranium by laser techniques was at an early stage of research and development.
  4. The Government understands that, in addition to Australia, the following countries are conducting research and development on laser isotope separation of uranium: the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. There are indications that some additional countries have at some time carried out initial investigations on enrichment of uranium by laser isotope separation methods, but it is not clear whether they have carried these further.

Woodsreef Mines Ltd (Question No. 5087)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

  1. What is the nature of the assistance provided to Woodsreef Mines by the Commonwealth Government.
  2. ) Did the Industries Assistance Commission recommend assistance to Woodsreef Mines; if not, what reasons did the Commission give for not recommending assistance.
  3. Did he support the Commission’s recommendations.
  4. Did he later reverse his decision on Woodsreef Mines; if so, what were the specific reasons for the change.
  5. In which electoral divisions are the major operations of Woodsreef Mines located.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

– The answere to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) The Commonwealth Government agreed in October 1978 to contribute over the 15 month period to 31 December 1979 up to $1.4m, to be matched by funds to at least that amount by the New South Wales Government, for on lending to the asbestos mine at Barraba, NSW, which is operated by the Chrysotile Corporation of Australia Pty Ltd (Reveiver Appointed), a wholly owned subsidiary of Woodsreef Mines Ltd. The assistance is by means of an interest-bearing repayable loan to NSW.
  2. In its Interim Report on Short Term Assistance dated 20 August 1978, the Industries Assistance Commission recommended that short term assistance not be accorded the production of asbestos in Australia.

The Commission’s reasons for this recommendation are set out in the IAC Report No. 1 8 1 . Briefly the IAC concluded that it was not clear whether the mine would be able to operate with low levels of assistance in the future or that problems it was facing could be assessed as short term in nature.

  1. On 12 October 1978 it was announced that the Government had accepted the IAC recommendation that short term assistance should not be accorded.
  2. The Government reviewed its decision not to provide assistance following provision by the company of further information relating to its market prospects, and the willingness of the NSW Government, and the Commercial Bank of Australia to contribute to the assistance arrangements. In the case of the Bank this assistance was by way of accrual of interest over the assistance period.
  3. The only rnining operation of Chrysotile Corporation and /or Woodsreef Mines is at Barraba which is situated in the electoral division of New England.

Woodsreef Mines Ltd (Question No. 5088)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

  1. At what locations and for what purposes does Woodsreef Mines carry on activities in Australia.
  2. ) What are the names and addresses of the (a) directors, (b) principal shareholders and (c) bankers of Woodsreef Mines.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Woodsreef Mines Limited has 100 per cent ownership of Chrysotile Corporation of Australia Pty Ltd (Receiver Appointed) which operates an asbestos mine and mill at Barraba, New South Wales.

Other assets have included 100 per cent ownership of Asbestos Mines Pty Limited, which until 24 April 1979 operated a small asbestos mine at Baryulgil, New South Wales. Exploration licences are held coveting 24,300 hectares in the Baryulgil area. Woodsreef Mines Ltd is also part owner of exploration licences in the Wellington area of New South Wales.

  1. (a) The Directors of Woodsreef Mines Ltd are H. H. Robinson (Chairman and Managing Director), M. Clay (Alt D. K. Barwick), J. E. Stedelbauer, G. R. Cowan, RearAdmiral A. G. McFarlane A.O. (Rtd), R. J. Merrill.

Directors ‘s addresses are not published in the company’s annual report.

  1. The principal shareholders are CBA Nominees Ltd and Woodsreef Minerals Ltd.

Information on shareholders’ addresses would be recorded in the company’s share register at Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., ANZ Bank Building, 19 London Circuit, Canberra City 2601.

  1. The 1978 Annual Report of Woodsreef Mines Ltd records the bankers as The Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd and the Bank of New South Wales.

Woodsreef Mines Ltd (Question No. 5089)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

On what dates, at what specific locations and for what purposes has he met with (a) principals or employees of Woodsreef Mines and ( b) any other persons associated with or representing Woodsreef Mines, since 1 January 1978.

Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

On a number of occasions during 1978 and 1979, and at various locations, I have met persons associated with the asbestos mine at Barraba, New South Wales, operated by

Chrysotile Corporation Pty Ltd, a subsidiary of Woodsreef Mines Ltd, to discuss operations at the mine.

Interstate Commission (Question No. 5091)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Is it a fact that the then Opposition successfully moved extensive amendments to the Interstate Commission Bill 1975.
  2. 2 ) What was the purpose of those amendments.
  3. Did he vote to accept those amendments in the House of Representatives.
  4. Did the body provided for by the Interstate Commission Act 1975 fail to conform to his perception of a Commission which would have power to regulate transport in Australia within the limitations of the Constitution; if so, why has he not amended the Act to provide a body compatible with that which he believed to be necessary in 1975; if not, why has he not proclaimed the Interstate Commission Act 1975 and established the Interstate Commission.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. To ensure that if, in the event, an Interstate Commission were established, its powers and functions would be more in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution than those envisaged in the original Bill.
  3. 1 agreed with the amendments.
  4. As indicated above, the body envisaged in the Interstate Commission Act 1975 as redrafted was more acceptable than that originally proposed. But the question assumes that this Government would necessarily wish to proclaim or amend that legislation. There is no basis for such an assumption.

Philippines Consulate: Alleged Breaches of Customs Act (Question Na 5094)

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

Have members of the Philippines Consulate or their families been investigated on alleged breaches of the Customs Act; if so, when did the alleged breaches take place and was diplomatic immunity waived by the Consulate.

Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

No. But I have been advised that officers of the Department of Business and Consumer Affairs, as a matter of routine, check clearances of goods on which diplomatic or consular concessions are claimed. These checks apply to all diplomatic and consular establishments in Australia and are not confined to any particular establishment.

Aurukun Mineral Leases (Question Na 5095)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to 1978 publications of the Queensland Government predicting major development of Aurukun Associates’ mineral leases.
  2. What representations have been made to the Australian Government for development and when were these representations made.
  3. What discussions have taken place with Australian Government Ministers and officials concerning the terms of the development.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. Yes.
  2. and (3) No recent representations have been made or discussions held on the terms of development of the Aurukun bauxite deposit However, on IS November 1979 I met briefly with the Project Officer of Aurukun Associates who outlined his organisation ‘s discussions with the Aurukun Aboriginal community and the more recently elected Aurukun Shire Council. These discussions were concerned with the employment and training opportunities for Aboriginals should mining operations commence there in the future.

Aboriginal Hostels Ltd (Question No. 5096)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

Does Commonwealth legislation require the resignation of an official of Aboriginal Hostels Ltd before that person can contest an election for (a) the Federal or (b) any State Parliament.

Mr Viner:
LP

-The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

page 3529

No

East Timor (Question No. 5097)

Mr Kerin:
WERRIWA, NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 15 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has the Government had regular information from a variety of sources on the level of fighting and the state of the welfare of the people of East Timor ever since Indonesia’s invasion in 1975.
  2. Can he say what are the most reliable estimates of the number of persons (a) killed as the result of fighting or as a consequence of the fighting and (b) who have died of starvation.
  3. Is there any evidence of the Indonesian Government following a policy of genocide.
  4. Has the Australian Government been actively informing the Indonesian Government of its concern for the plight of the Tiimorese during the last 4 years.
  5. lt not, when will diplomatic sensitivities give way to humanitarian principles.
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. No. I have seen various recent estimates given publicity in the news media but reliable statistics which would establish their accuracy are not available. I note that the Indonesian Foreign Minister, Dr Mochtar was quoted by the London Financial Times as saying on 15 November that about 60,000 people had died in East Timor since the withdrawal of the Portuguese authorities in August 1975, as a result either of civil war or starvation. He was also reported as saying that, in the absence of a proper census, it was not possible to give precise figures.
  3. I am aware of various allegations that the Indonesian authorities have practised genocide in East Timor. I am not aware of any evidence to substantiate these allegations.
  4. Yes.
  5. See answer to (4).

General Aviation Maintenance (Question No. 5098)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 5 November 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Has his attention been drawn to comments concerning poor standards of general aviation maintenance in Airworthiness Advisory Circular No. 113, November 1 979.
  2. Who is responsible for issuing maintenance releases following inspection of general aviation aircraft.
  3. ) Has any action been taken against any of those responsible for maintenance releases in cases where inspections of aircraft have been found to be inadequate; if so, what was the nature of the action.
  4. What specific action will his Department take to ensure a higher standard of general aviation maintenance.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Airworthiness Advisory Circular No. 113 contains an article concerning evidence of poor maintenance of general aviation aircraft. This article, a repeat of one published in 1976, is part of my Department’s ongoing program to draw the attention of the aircraft industry to matters affecting safety.
  2. A maintenance release is normally issued by either the holder of a certificate of approval or the holder of an aircraft maintenance engineers licence covering the maintenance.
  3. My Department has cancelled or suspended certificates of approval and licences in some cases, has prosecuted some in court of law and has counselled others. The action in any particular case is determined by the nature of the deficiency, the strength of the evidence and the previous history of the individual involved.
  4. Action is continually being taken to ensure that the required standard of maintenance in general aviation is adequate and is being observed by the industry.

Effects of Heat on Light Aircraft (Question No. 5099)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 15 November 1979:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to comments in Airworthiness Advisory Circular No. 1 1 3, November 1 979, concerning major defects involving the effects of heat on the wing spars of some light twin aircraft; if so, which types of aircraft are affected by the defect
  2. How many cases of the defect have been detected by his Department
  3. What specific action has been taken by his Department to prevent further occurrences of the defect.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s questionis as follows:

  1. Airworthiness Advisory Circular No. 1 13 contains an article warning of possible weakening of the wing spars of light twin aircraft if an exhaust gas leak occurs. Potentially, the problem can occur in most light twins and that is why the article is not specific to any manufacturer.
  2. The Department has received Major Defect Reports of 3 occurrences on Cessna 402 ‘s.
  3. On the basis of the specific Australian experience my Depanment has issued Airworthiness Directives that impose special inspections at SO hour intervals on the exhaust systems of Cessna 300 and 400 series aircraft.

Association of South East Asian Nations: Trade Agreements (Question No. 5102)

Dr Blewett:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 15 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Further to the reply to question No. 4568 (Hansard, 16 October 1979, page 2084), is the formal framework referred to the same as the early warning system, referred to by the Chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence, whereby trading partners were told of intentions to increase barriers against their exports ( Weekend Australian, 27-8 October 1979).
  2. ) Is an early warning system the only formal framework Australia has for economic relations with ASEAN.
  3. If so, why has Australia failed to negotiate a trade or industrial cooperation agreement with ASEAN.
  4. Will the negotiation of an industrial cooperation agreement between ASEAN and the European Economic Community and the absence of an agreement between Australia and ASEAN place Australia at a comparative disadvantage in developing closer economic links with ASEAN.
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) and (2) The formal framework to promote relations between ASEAN and Australia is that described in paragraph one of the answer to Question No. 4568. The ‘early warning system’ is one component of the arrangements on trade and operates under the ASEAN-Australia Consultative Meetings. It provides for reasonable prior notification to ASEAN to allow for its effective consultation and representation in respect of items of trade interest. Details of the early warning system were announced by the Minister for Foreign Affairs on 13 November 1978 (copy available in Parliamentary Library).
  2. The Association of South East Asian Nations is not a party, as an Association, to any international agreement. While ASEAN may negotiate terms for its members as a group the agreements concluded between the members and other countries are bilateral. It is understood that the proposed agreement between ASEAN members and the Economic Community will, in practice, consist of five bilateral agreements. As noted in the answer to Question No. 4568 Australia already has several bilateral trade agreements with ASEAN countries. These now include a trade agreement with Thailand signed on 5 October 1 979.
  3. The eventual conclusion of a Cooperation Agreement between the European Communities and the ASEAN countries is not expected to disadvantage Australia’s opportunities for industrial cooperation. It is considered that adequate opportunities for industrial cooperation exists between

Australia and ASEAN members under the ASEANAustralia Economic Cooperation Program, Australia’s bilateral economic agreements and, more generally, through arrangements in the private sector. Also, in this regard Australia already has agreements on double taxation avoidance with Singapore and the Philippines. Negotiations have recently concluded successfully with Malaysia and have begun with Thailand on similar agreements. Officials of ASEAN member countries and Australia have agreed to discuss on some future occasion the desirability of concluding investment guarantees.

Australian National Railways: Sale of Land (Question No. 5105)

Mr Wallis:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 5 November 1 979:

  1. 1 ) What action will Australian National Railways take regarding the many blocks of land now lying idle at Port Augusta, S.A. following the demolition of the older type homes owned by the railways in that area.
  2. Will the blocks be released for sale for further housing or other purposes: If not, to what use is the land to be put.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

I refer the honourable member to my reply, to his question No. 3685, in the Hansard of 73 May 1979 (page 2318). The only information I can add is that negotiations are proceeding with the South Australian Housing Trust to ascertain whether agreement can be reached for the Trust to take over all of the Commission’s housing and land reserved for housing at Port Augusta.

Saudi Arabia: Oil Pricing Policies (Question No. 5109)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 20 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Has his attention been drawn to Press reports which indicate that Saudi Arabia is upset that its lower oil prices have benefitted the oil companies instead of the consumer and that consequently the Saudis may raise the price of their crude oil before the next OPEC meeting.
  2. Have these reports been the subject of discussion between the Saudi Arabian Government and the Australian Government.
  3. Is profiteering by oil companies having an adverse effect on Saudi crude oil pricing policies.
  4. What action will the Australian Government take by itself or in conjunction with other countries to curtail this profiteering and to help maintain the hitherto moderate stance of Saudi Arabia on oil pricing.
Mr Peacock:
LP

– The answers to the honourable member’s questions are as follows*.

  1. Yes.
  2. ) and (3 ) The Australian Government has not discussed these matters with the Saudi Arabian Government The factors which contribute to Saudi Arabia’s pricing policies are a matter for Saudi Arabia to determine for itself.
  3. So far as Australia is concerned the oil companies operate within the framework of oil pricing policies and taxation measures determined by the Government and clearly spelled out in the Prime Minister’s Energy Statement of 27 June 1979 and in the Budget Statement of 21 August 1979.

Throughout 1979- a year marked by serious disruptions in the international oil markets- Saudi Arabia has maintained moderate and responsible policies in regard to the pricing and supply of its crude oil. Naturally the Government hopes that Saudi Arabia will be willing to maintain its moderate pricing policies and the production levels on which they are based. We consider that the best way Australia can encourage Saudi Arabia in this matter is for us to take action both domestically and internationally to encourage exploration for oil, to conserve oil and to encourage the development of alternative energy sources. As is also clear from the Government’s statements refered to above, Australia has appropriate policies in place to pursue these aims.

Insurance Industry: Bankruptcies (Question No. 5113)

Mr Jacobi:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 20 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many persons giving their occupation as (a) insurance broker, (b) insurance salesman and (c) insurance agent, have become bankrupt during each year since 1 970.
  2. How many persons have entered into deeds and schemes of arrangements with creditors under the provisions of the Bankruptcy Act during each year since 1 970.
Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Statistics relating to the number of insurance brokers, insurance salesmen and insurance agents who have become bankrupt since 1 972 are not available. For the period from 1970 to 1972, statistics are available in relation to insurance agents only and they are as follows:

1969-70-5, 1970-71-3, 1971-72-2.

  1. Statistics relating to the number of persons who have entered into Deeds of Assignment, Deeds of Arrangement or Compositions pursuant to Part X of the Bankruptcy Act since 1970 are as follows:

Australia-Japan Fishing Agreement (Question No. 51 15)

Mr Kerin:

asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 20 November 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Is it a fact that Australian waters banned for fishing by Japanese fishing vessels were never fished in the areas specified in the agreement between the Australian and Japanese Governments (concerning Japanese tuna long-line fishing) which came into effect on 1 November 1979.
  2. It is also a fact that the ban in the agreement will have no effect whatsoever on conservation offish species.
  3. Did the former Minister for Primary Industry promise there would be no fishing by foreign boats on stocks already being fished by Australians.
  4. Does the fishing agreement allow Japanese tuna longliners to catch southern bluefin tuna from latitude 35°S to 60°S, an area where Australian fishermen have been catching fish for 30 years.
  5. Has his attention been drawn to the statement by the President of the Tuna Boat Owners Association of Australia that Japanese boats bunkering in Brisbane, Sydney, Hobart, Fremantle and Albany will use up approximately 100 million gallons of Australia ‘s distillate each year; if so, will the Government assure the fishing industry that there will be a continuity of supply of distillate to fishermen in the event of a shortage.
  6. Can he give an assurance to the fishing industry that full consultation was maintained with industry representatives throughout negotiations leading up to the 200 mile fishing agreement with Japan.
  7. Were 2 fishing industry representatives requested against the best interest of their industry, not to divulge information on the 200 mile agreement to other officials of the industry prior to its release.
  8. How many Japanese boats regularly fish Australian waters each year.
  9. Would their catch be worth approximately $300m; if not, what would be its value.
  10. 10) On what basis was the $ 1 .4m fee struck.
  11. What sum per boat does this amount represent.
Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. No.
  2. Exclusion of Japanese longliners from the areas concerned is unlikely to have a major conservation impact. The exclusions were principally intended to minimise interaction between the Japanese and Australian fishing fleets.
  3. In his statement in the House of Representatives on 25 September the Minister for Primary Industry said that foreigners will not be allowed access to fisheries fully exploited by Australians or likely to be in the near future.
  4. The fishing agreement with Japan allows Japanese longliners to operate within designated areas of the Australian fishing zone.

The Australian southern bluefin fishery takes place within the Australian fishing zone in the Great Australian Bight, off the coast of South Australia, and off the south east coast between Newcastle and north east Tasmania.

Most of the Japanese southern bluefin fishery within the Australian fishing zone takes place further offshore, further south and at different times of the year than the Australian fishery. Most of the southern bluefin catch of the Japanese fleet is taken outside the Australian fishing zone.

  1. This is a matter for the Minister for National Development. Officers of my depanment have bought the matter to the attention of the Department of National Development.
  2. The fishing industry was consulted during the negotiations.
  3. All fishing industry representatives with whom details of the agreement were discussed were asked to protect information which, if it became publically available during the negotiations, could have prejudiced Australia’s negotiating position.
  4. Approximately 250.
  5. The value of the catch varies according to catch volume, quality, composition and current market conditions. The average value in recent years of the catch of the Japanese longline fleet in what is now the Australian fishing zone is estimated to be in the range $25-35m dollars per annum.
  6. The fee is a negotiated figure based on an assessment of likely catches and market prices.
  7. The fee of $ 1.4m is payable in respect of the total number of boats licensed to enter the fishery. It is not apportioned on a per boat basis.

Airport Car Rental Contracts (Question No. 5119)

Mr Burns:
ISAACS, VICTORIA

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 20 November 1979:

Will he table (a) details of the specified percentages tendered by each operator in relation to the recent airport car rental contracts and (b) a detailed schedule of the Government airport gross revenues declared by each concessionaire for the period 1 July to 30 September 1979.

Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. No. Whilst the names of the successful tenderers and the amounts of consideration offered by them were published in Government Gazette No. G.40 of 9 October 1979 at page 102 in accordance with the car rental tender schedule, it is not proposed to publish the percentages tendered by the concessionaires. This information is considered to be commercially confidential.
  2. No. In accordance with the concession agreements, the successful tenderers are required to provide this information to my Department which treats it as commercially confidential. Further, all the major companies, except one, have indicated their desire for this information to remain confidential

World Wildlife Fund: Taxation Deductions (Question No. 5120)

Dr Klugman:

asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 20 November 1979:

Why is the World Wildlife Fund included in the list of charities to which donations are tax deductible, while donations to UNICEF, Save the Children, and Austcare, which give aid to human beings, receive no similar tax relief.

Mr Howard:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

It has been longstanding policy that the gift provisions of the income tax law apply, so far as is practicable, only to organisations whose operations are conducted within Australia. In the case of overseas aid programs, that policy has regard to the fact that large direct financial contributions are made by Australia through a number of official aid channels. The recent departures from this policy in respect of the Kampuchea and East Timor appeals reflect the very special circumstances surrounding those appeals.

I note that the bulk of funds raised by World Wildlife Fund Australia is allocated to Australian projects.

Uranium: Demand and Supply (Question No. 5126)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 20 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) In view of the Prime Minister’s statement to the House on 17 October 1979, that what is now happening represents a three-fold expansion of uranium requirements over the next 10 years (Hansard, page 2 102), is he able to say what is the estimated annual demand for uranium by (a) the United States of America, (b) the United Kingdom, (c) France, (d) West Germany, (e) Italy, (f) Japan, (g) the Republic of Korea, (h) Taiwan, (J) the Philippines, (k) Finland and (1) Canada during (i) 1980, (ii) 1985 and (iii) 1990.
  2. ls he also able to say in each case what is the assured supply of uranium under existing sales agreements.
  3. Is he also able to say what is the estimated annual production of uranium by (a) the United States of America, (b) Canada, (c) South Africa, (d) Namibia, (e) France, (f) Niger, (g) the Gabon and (h) other Western and Third World countries during (i) 1980, (ii) 1985 and (iii) 1990.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: ( 1 ), (2) and (3)1 refer the honourable member to the joint OECD Nuclear Energy Agency/International Atomic Energy Agency report ‘Uranium Resources, Production and Demand ‘of December 1977.

A further edition of this report is expected to be published in December 1979 and should be available shortly thereafter.

Export of Uranium (Question No. 5127)

Mr Uren:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 20 November 1979:

  1. What approvals have been granted to (a) Mary Kathleen Uranium Ltd, (b) Ranger Uranium Mines Pty Ltd and (c) Queensland Mines Ltd for the export of uranium in pursuance of contracts entered into force Before 2 December 1972.
  2. What was the (a) date of approval, (b) weight of uranium approved for export, (c) weight of uranium actually exported and (d) source of the uranium in each case.
  3. Through which ports has the uranium been transported and at which plants has it been processed or used in each case.
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows: ( 1 ), (2) and (3) See answer to Question No. 4624.

Permanent Residence Visas (Question No. 5132)

Dr Cass:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 20 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) How do the new entry arrangements which came into force on 1 September 1979 apply to persons who were issued with a permanent residence visa before I September 1979 and who are still residing overseas.
  2. If the current passport of such a person expires whilst that person is still overseas will the permanent residence visa for Australia be automatically transferred to the new passport issued by their country of origin.
  3. What steps must be taken by the prospective immigrant to ensure the permanent residence visa does not expire with the passport
  4. For how long does a permanent residence visa remain valid whilst the holder is in fact living overseas, when the visa was issued (a) before 1 September 1979 and (b) after 1 September 1979.
  5. If a person with a permanent residence visa has to spend a considerable amount of time overseas for business reasons and still has a non-Australian passport, what criteria must be satisfied to ensure the visa will not lapse.
  6. If one of the criteria is a specified term of residence in Australia, is that term expected to be an uninterrupted period or does a number of shorter periods in total exceeding or at least equal to that specified term, satisfy the residence in Australia requirements.
  7. What measures have been taken to inform persons overseas holding permanent residence visas for Australia of the conditions which ensure their visa remains valid, and have guidelines been issued to officers overseas representing his Department of these requirements and the steps to be taken to ensure visa holders overseas do not unknowingly lose their permanent residence visa for Australia.
Mr MacKellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. The arrangements which came into force on 1 September, 1979, related to the issue of return endorsements after that date. The changes are not retrospective.
  2. Yes, on application, if the person concerned is a bona fide resident of Australia or genuinely intends taking up permanent residence during the validity of the visa.
  3. See (2).
  4. (a) and (b) Authorities to return to Australia issued prior to 1 September 1979 and return endorsements issued subsequently are generally valid for up to three years.
  5. A ‘permanent residence’ visa has no force or effect after entry to Australia has been made. Authority to return to Australia must be sought, preferably before going overseas and, if granted, the person concerned should ensure that he or she returns to Australia before the expiry of the return authority in his or her passport.
  6. The period of residence in Australia is one of the criteria. In special circumstances- each such case is considered separately- the aggregation of periods of residence may be taken into account.
  7. Persons holding visas and return endorsements should be aware of the validity of the authority for their entry or return to Australia as this is shown in their passports. Officers representing the Department overseas are briefed on this and other policies and procedures on an on-going basis.

Defence Force: Alcohol Problem (Question No. 5133)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 20 November 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Is it a fact that official defence records indicate that 12 per cent of members of the Defence Force have a serious alcohol problem.
  2. Were figures to support this provided to the media by his Department or officers of the Defence Force.
Mr Killen:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. No.
  2. See (1) Judgement as to what constitutes a ‘serious alcohol problem’ is bound to vary from observer to observer. The Defence Force is not, and does not expect to be, immune from problems that affect the community at large. To my knowledge there is no objective survey which, based on common criteria, would indicate where the Defence Force would stand in relation to the community as a whole, or where its various components would stand in relation to (say) regions, age groups, sexes, religious groups, ethnic groups, occupational groups etc. in the wider community.

Defence Force: Drug Abuse (Question No. 5134)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 20 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Did he authorise a private briefing on Defence Force drug abuse for a reporter of Playboy magazine.
  2. Were (a) A. V. M. Morgan, (b) W. C. Parker, (c) W. C. White, (d) Brigadier Hooper, (e) Brigadier Ewing, (f) Captain Gibbs, (g) Commodore Johnstone and (h) Colonel Duke detailed to provide the briefing.
  3. Were other representatives of the media advised or invited to be present.
  4. Was a record of the briefing taken and kept, if so, will he make it available to the Parliament.
Mr Killen:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. No.
  2. ) and (3 ) The officers named participated in discussions arranged by the Director of Public Information in the Department of Defence following an approach by a journalist, Mr Lee Patterson. It is the practice of the Department to arrange, whenever it reasonably can, for individual journalists following up specific and specialised lines of inquiry to be given access to officers who may be able to assist. I hope recent events will not discourage that practice. Regrettably in the instance referred to in the question, the article subsequently written by the journalist implied that he had been given access to official information which had previously been withheld, even from the Parliament. In fact, the information was essentially the same as that presented openly in a public hearing of a Royal Commission in 1977, and was not the information sought in the Parliamentary question alluded to.
  3. No.

Leopard Tanks: Gunsights (Question No. 5136)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 20 November 1979: (Question No. 5136)

Mr Scholes:

asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 20 November 1 979:

  1. 1 ) Have gunsights for Australia’s Leopard tanks been found not to meet Australian Army requirements.
  2. Are infra-red gunsights highly vulnerable to anti-tank weapons.
  3. Did the Australian Defence Science and Technology Division provide advice on the form of gunsights needed.
  4. Was the Army Armour Command consulted on gunsight requirements; if so, were infra-red sights recommended.
Mr Killen:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. I ) No. At the time of selection of the Leopard tank no contending tanks had sights superior to those incorporated in the Leopard. Subsequent developments have lead to passive night sighting equipment now becoming available; however the acquisition of such equipment is not considered to be justified under present circumstances and the existing equipment allows for adequate training in night operations.

    1. infra-red sights are no more vulnerable to anti-tank weapons than are any other types of sight. The source of energy radiation on which they rely is, however, detectable by a variety of viewing devices.
    2. and (4) Both the Defence Science and Technology Organisation and the Director, Australian Armoured Corps, were involved in the development of requirements, trials and assessment of contenders, and the final selection of Leopard (including its infra-red night sight) as the medium tank for the Australian Army.

Community Development Employment Projects (Question No. 5142)

Dr Everingham:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 2 1 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Will workers under Community Development Employment Projects comprise all formerly unemployed members of the participant community or all those formerly entitled to unemployment benefit.
  2. If not, what other categories of worker will be included and what other income will be available to unemployed non-workers.
  3. What monitoring, audit or assessment of work value will be carried out and by whom on behalf of each community.
  4. What proportion of C.D.E.P. funds will be allocated to (a) wages, (b) other resources for public works and (c) administration and evaluation.
  5. What effect does the scheme have on unemployment figures produced by the (a) Commonwealth Employment Service and (b) Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Mr Viner:
LP

– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. and (2) Each community decides who should be offered work under a Community Development Employment Project. If more people are seeking work than can be employed, they could be eligible for unemployment benefit, subject to the ordinary tests.
  2. Regular monitoring and assessment is carried out by officers of my Department, with the assistance of officers from the Department of Employment and Youth Affairs.
  3. The allocation for wages approximates the total value of unemployment benefits for which unemployed members of the community are eligible. Wages on costs (workers’ compensation, etc) are provided in addition to this allocation. Costs of administration, materials and equipment may also be provided up to a limit of approximately ten per cent of the allocation for wages and associated costs.
  4. As indicated in my statement of 14 November, some 650 Aboriginals are at present employed under the scheme and the expansion of it could provide employment for some 1,200 more. The scheme is aimed at providing employment in remote communities where unemployed people often do not register as such and are not included in official statistics, but the expansion of the scheme is intended to help reduce the numbers of unemployed Aboriginals.

Woodsreef Mines Ltd (Question No. 5143)

Mr Morris:

asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 2 1 November 1 979:

  1. 1 ) On what occasions, at what locations and for what purposes has he met with representatives or associates of the Commercial Bank of Australia in relation to (a) matters pertaining to Woodsreef Mines, and (b) any other matters since 1 January 1978.
  2. ) What are the names, designations and addresses of the representatives or associates referred to in part ( 1 ).
Mr Anthony:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. and (2) At the request of the Government, I had a meeting with representatives of the Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd in 1978, pertaining to the Woodsreef mine. These discussions were held in confidence and it is not appropriate to divulge the names and other details of those who participated in the discussions.

Commonwealth Expenditure on Roads (Question No. 5156)

Mr Hayden:

asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 2 1 November 1 979:

What sums were paid by the Commonwealth in the Electoral Divisions of ( 1 ) the Northern Territory, (2) Canberra, (3) Kalgoorlie, (4) Penh, (5) Swan, (6) Sturt, (7) Kingston, (8) Ballarat, (9) Bendigo, ( 10) Deakin, (11) McMillan, (12) Isaacs, (13) Henty, ( 14) Holt, ( 15) La Trobe, ( 16) Hotham, (17) Bass, (18) Franklin, (19) Braddon, (20) Wilmot, (21) Denison, (22) Wide Bay, (23) Herbert, (24) Fadden, (25) Dawson, (26) Lilley, (27) Bowman, (28) Brisbane, (29) Leichhardt, (30) Calare, (31) Eden Monaro, (32) Cook, (33) Lowe, (34) Barton, (35) Macquarie, (36) StGeorge, (37) Phillip and (38) Macarthur for (a) national highway construction, (b) national highway maintenance, (c) national commerce roads, (d) rural arterial roads, (e) rural local roads, (f) urban arterial roads, (g) urban local roads and (h) minor traffic engineering and road safety improvements during (i) 1975-76, (ii) 1976-77, (iii) 1977-78, (iv) 1978-79 and (v) 1 July 1979 to date.

Mr Nixon:
NCP/NP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

The information sought by the honourable member has already been provided to the members responsible to the electorates in question at the time when work in the respective electorates was approved as a pan of a program submitted by the States. This information is too voluminous to incorporate in Hansard and I have directed my Department to assemble the data and I will forward it direct to the honourable member when this task is completed.

Taxation: Mr W. J. Lee (Question No. 5165)

Mr James:

asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 2 1 November 1979:

  1. Has his attention been drawn to my speech of 8 November 1979 during the grievance debate which concerned the activities of a Phillip Street barrister, Mr W. J. Lee (Hansard, page 2786).
  2. If so, will he make available to senior investigating officers of the Taxation Office, who may be interested in the activities of Mr Lee, all departmental files on which Mr Lee has made representations during the last 10 years.
  3. Will he make a statement indicating the availability of these files.
  4. Will he also provide the Taxation Office with a list of the names of the Chinese nationals resident in Hong Kong on whose behalf Mr Lee made representations to his Department but which were not successful.
Mr MacKellar:
LP

– The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. Yes.
  2. , (3) and (4) The Department will co-operate fully if the Australian Taxation Office seeks its assistance.

Aboriginal Land Rights (Question No. 5166)

Dr Blewett:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 21 November 1979:

Will the proposed examination of Aboriginal land rights legislation referred to by the Minister on 1 3 November 1 979 be without detriment to the basic principles of the Act; if so, will the power of veto possessed by the Aboriginal community over developments at Jabiluka not be abrogated as a result of this examination.

Mr Viner:
LP

-The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

In my statement of 13 November I emphasised that the examination would be without detriment to the basic principles of the Act; and I further stated in the Senate on IS November during the passage of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment Bill that the right of veto is a matter of principle and, therefore, outside the scope of the review.

Disposal of Waste Salt (Question No. 5174)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Science and the Environment, upon notice, on 22 November 1979:

  1. Are there any proposals to dispose of waste salt from current or proposed power stations in the Newcastle area, New South Wales (which use Lake Macquarie as a source of cooling water) in disused mine shafts in the Hunter Valley; if so, can the Minister state whether any Federal or New South Wales environmental impact assessment of these proposals has been carried out or is planned.
  2. If assessments are in train, have they been directed to examine the effects of salt dumping on the water supply in the Hunter Valley and, in particular, any possible adverse effects on the wine industry and other agricultural industry in the area.
Mr Groom:
LP

-The Minister for Science and the Environment has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

  1. 1 ) The construction and operation of power stations, including the disposal of associated wastes, are matters which are the responsibility of the respective State Governments. My Department has not had referred to it the question of the disposal of waste salt from a proposed power station in the Newcastle area and no environmental assessment has been undertaken or proposed. (2)See(l).

Aboriginal Affairs: Negotiations with States (Question No. 5176)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 22 November 1979:

Further to the Minister’s answer to question No. 4915 (Hansard, 6 November 1979, page 2671 ) (a) how many bilateral discussions have taken place to date, (b) where did those discussions take place and what was the duration of each meeting, (c) what are the names, designations and salaries of all Commonwealth officers who have been engaged in these discussions, (d) have the officers of the States been of equivalent status to the Commonwealth officers and (e) have any of the Commonwealth officers involved in these discussions come from Commonwealth Departments other than the Department of Aboriginal Affairs; if so, which Departments.

Mr Viner:
LP

-The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

I refer the honourable member to my answer to question No. 5053.

Framlingham Aboriginal Reserve (Question No. 5177)

Mr Holding:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 22 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) What financial assistance has been provided by the Commonwealth to the Aboriginal people of the Framlingham Reserve in the Western District of Victoria during each of the years 1970-71 to 1978-79 inclusive.
  2. What is the estimated Commonwealth funding for Framlingham Reserve for 1979-80.
  3. Under what classifications and for what projects has Federal funding been granted.
  4. What feasibility studies have been conducted by the Department of Aboriginal Affairs into the viability of projects which will guarantee financial independence and selfdetermination for the Aboriginal people of the Framlingham Reserve.
  5. Were any studies undertaken in conjunction with persons living on the reserve.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question: (1), (2) and (3) Records held by my Department do not indicate that any direct Commonwealth financial assistance was provided to the Framlingham community before 1975-76. Assistance provided by my Department from 1975-76 to 1978-79 and estimated funding for 1979-80 is as follows: 1975- 76, $6,735-Employment. 1976- 77, $2,000-Purchase of fire fighting equipment. 1977- 78, Nil. 1978- 79, Nil. 1979- 80, $30,525- Training and wages costs, repairs and maintenance to existing housing and services including fire prevention equipment.

Note: above figures reflect financial assistance by my Department Direct assistance by other agencies is not known although it is understood that $9,250 is to be made available in 1 979-80 under the NEAT Scheme and $800 is to be provided through the Aboriginal Arts Board.

  1. No feasibility studies have been carried out by my Department
  2. No.

Social Security: Official Openings of Projects (Question No. 5190)

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 22 November 1979:

  1. In respect of official openings of projects which received Federal Government funding which (a) local Federal Government Member, (b) local Federal Opposition Member, (c) Government Senator or (d) Opposition Senator officially represented the Minister since December 1975.
  2. On which occasions were Government cheques handed over.
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

The information requested by the honourable member is not held in a form that would enable this question to be answered without very considerable effort I am not prepared to direct that the staff resources which would be required be diverted from more essential duties.

Business and Consumer Affairs: Official Openings of Projects (Question No. 5202)

Mr Les Johnson:
HUGHES, NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 22 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) In respect of official openings of projects which received Federal Government funding which (a) local Federal Government Member, (b) local Federal Opposition Member, (c) Government Senator or (d) Opposition Senator officially represented him since December 1 975.
  2. On which occasions were Government cheques handed over.
Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

  1. There have been no occasions since I assumed my ministerial portfolio on which I was so represented.
  2. Not applicable.

Export of Birds (Question No. 5251)

Mr Hodges:

asked the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 22 November 1979:

  1. What action has been taken to implement the recommendation of the Standing Committee on Environment and Conservation relating to the relaxation of the export policy to allow Government controlled export of aviary-bred birds and wild common pest species.
  2. Would the implementation of the Committee’s recommendation contravene the provisions of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
Mr Fife:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member ‘s question is as follows:

  1. 1 ) Because controls relating to the conservation, keeping or removal of native fauna are primarily the responsibility of State governments and are exercised under state legislation the recommendation was referred for comment to the Council of Nature Conservation Ministers (CONCOM) which is comprised of Federal and State Ministers with responsibility for conservation. After consideration of the proposal CONCOM unanimously agreed to recommend that no action should be taken to relax existing Federal policy regarding the export of native fauna. The Commonwealth Government has accepted the CONCOM recommendation.
  2. No.

Financial Assistance to the Handicapped (Question Na 5260)

Mr Kerin:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 22 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) What funding, recurrent or capital, is appropriated annually with respect to basic physical impairments suffered by individuals, such as blindness, deafness, spasticity, crippled, paraplegia, quadraplegia, etc.
  2. What sum of the funding for individuals or organisations caring for individuals is provided by State Governments and charitable organisations.
  3. 3 ) Is any record kept of the amounts of tax deductible donations going to specific organisations caring for impaired Australians or to the total of persons suffering from an impairment
Mr Hunt:
NCP/NP

-The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member’s question:

The information requested by the honourable member is not held in a form that would enable this question to be answered without very considerable effort I am not prepared to direct that the staff resources which would be required be diverted from more essential duties.

Employment and Youth Affairs: Industrial Dispute Advertisements (Question Na 5261)

Mr Kerin:

asked the Minister for Employment and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 22 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) Have advertisements been placed in the media stating the Government’s or his Department’s position on any industrial dispute; if so, on what occasion, with which media, and what was the cost
  2. Was the money spent from a budgetary, special or permanent appropriation; if so, which appropriation.
Mr Viner:
LP

-The answer to the honourable member’s question is as follows:

page 3536

No

Cite as: Australia, House of Representatives, Debates, 22 November 1979, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/hofreps/1979/19791122_reps_31_hor116/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant