31st Parliament · 1st Session
The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Condor Laucke) took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.
page 1277
– I inform the Senate that the Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr Lynch) left Australia on 22 April for discussions in China and the Philippines. He is expected to return on 7 May. During his absence the Minister for Productivity (Mr Macphee) will act as Minister for Industry and Commerce.
The Minister for Primary Industry (Mr Sinclair) left Australia on 23 April for discussions in Europe and Mexico. He is expected to return later this week. During his absence the Minister for the Northern Territory (Mr Adermann) will act as Minister for Primary Industry. The Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs (Mr Fife) will perform the duties of Leader of the House.
The Minister for Finance (Mr Eric Robinson) is taking leave from his ministerial duties while the inquiry into certain allegations made in respect of the 1977 electoral redistributions in Queensland is proceeding. The Treasurer (Mr Howard) is Acting Minister for Finance.
page 1277
– I present the following petition from 9 citizens of Australia:
To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned members and ex members of the Citizens Forces of Australia respectfully sheweth:
On 14 February 1975, the then Australian Government deprived the officers and men of the Australian Citizen Naval Military and Air Forces of the distinctive and historic Decorations and Medals for long service and good conduct, namely the Reserve Decoration, the Efficiency Decoration, the Air Efficiency Award, the Efficiency Medal and Long Service and Good Conduct Medals, awarded for long and meritorious voluntary service in the citizen forces.
The proposed substitution of the National Medal for these Decorations and Medals varies the principle of selective recognition of efficient voluntary service in the citizen forces in that it recognises the period of service only and embraces also full time service as well in the defence forces as in the police, fire brigade and ambulance services.
This deprivation caused and is continuing to cause serious discontent amongst personnel of the Citizens Forces who willingly and cheerfully give of their spare time outside their normal full time civilian careers, to serve Her Majesty and Australia.
The Reserve Forces of Australia have been recognised by the present Government as a valuable- and costeffective component of the Defence Forces. Anomalously, whilst the Government is actually supporting recruiting for these Forces it has imposed and continued this deprivation which as aforesaid has depressed the morale of the Citizen Forces.
Her Majesty has not cancelled the said Decorations and Medals.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray.
Your Honourable House take appropriate action to resume the award of the several distinctive Reserve Forces Decorations and Medals for Long Service and Good Conduct to members of the Royal Australian Naval Reserve, Army Reserve (CMF) and the RAAF Citizens Air Force.
Petition received.
To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled. The humble Petition of the undersigned members and ex-members of the Citizens Forces of Australia respectfully sheweth:
On 14 February 1975, the then Australian Government deprived the Officers and men of the Australian Citizen Naval Military and Air Forces of the distinctive and historic Decorations and Medals for long service and good conduct, namely the Reserve Decoration, the Efficiency Decoration, the Air Efficiency Award, the Efficiency Medal and Long Service and Good Conduct Medals, awarded for long and meritorious voluntary service in the Citizen forces:
The proposed substitution of the National Medal for these Decorations and Medals varies the principle of selective recognition of efficient voluntary service in the Citizen forces in that it recognises the period of service only and embraces also full time service as well in the defence forces as in the police, fire brigade and ambulance service:
This deprivation caused and is continuing to cause serious discontent amongst personnel of the Citizen Forces who wiliingfully and cheerfully give of their spare time outside their normal full time civilian careers, to serve Her Majesty and Australia:
The Reserve Forces of Australia have been recognised by the present Government as a valuable- and costeffective component of the Defence Forces. Anomalously, whilst the Government is actually supporting recruiting for these Forces it has imposed and continued this deprivation which as foresaid has depressed the morale of the Citizen Forces:
Her Majesty has not cancelled the said Decorations and Medals.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray
Your Honourable House take appropriate action to resume the award of the several distinctive and historic Reserve Forces Decorations and Medals to members of the Royal Australian Naval Reserve, Citizens Military Force (Army Reserve) and Citizens Air Force.
Petition received.
– Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows:
To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled the petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:
That it is necessary for the Commonwealth Government to renew for a further term of at least 3 years the States Grants (Dwellings for Pensioners) Act 1974-77, renewed for one year expiring on the 30 June 1 978.
The demand for dwellings has not slackened as the waiting list (all States) of 12,060 single and 4,120 couples as at the 30 June 1977, showeth.
Your petitioners respectfully draw the attention of the Commonwealth Government to the Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Aged Persons’ Housing 1975 under the Chairmanship of the Rev. K. Seaman (now Governor of South Australia) which recommended additional funds to State housing authorities to meet the demand for low-rental accommodation in the proportion of $4 for $ 1 with the proviso that the States do not reduce their existing expenditure and
That the Act include married pensioners eligible for supplementary assistance and migrants as specified by the Seaman Report and that particular consideration be paid to the special needs and requirements of the prospective tenants in the location and design of such dwellings.
Furthermore, your petitioners desire to draw the Government ‘s attention to the hardship of many pensioner home owners caused by the high cost of maintenance.
The Social Security Annual Report 1976-77 shows that 24.6 per cent, or 283,000 home owning pensioners, have a weekly income in excess of the pension of less than $6 per week.
Your petitioners strongly urge the Commonwealth Government to establish a fund whereby loans can be made to means tested pensioners for the purpose of effecting necessary maintenance to their homes. Such a loan to be at minimal interest rates sufficient to cover administrative costs and to be repaid by the estate upon the death of a single pensioner before probate or upon the death of the surviving spouse in the case of married pensioners or where two pensioners jointly own the dwelling. Administration to be carried out by local government bodies.
And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Senator Carrick and Senator Peter Baume.
Petitions received.
To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate 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 Senator Withers.
Petition received.
To the Honourable President and Senators here assembled we the undersigned humbly pray:
Petition received.
page 1278
page 1278
-I ask the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister in Federal Affairs whether he is aware of yesterday’s announcement by Mr Hamer, the Premier of Victoria, that at the next Premiers Conference he would propose that the States take over sales tax and discontinue the levying of land tax. If so, is he also aware that such a change would yield Victoria approximately $500m from sales tax compared with the sum of approximately $ 1 10m that it currently receives by way of land tax? Does the Minister believe this indicates that Mr Hamer considers that his State is receiving inadequate revenues?
-I did hear-I believe on the radio- an item which indicated that the Premier of Victoria, Mr Hamer, proposed to suggest at the next Premiers Conference that sales tax might be made a tax for the States. I do not know the details and I do not know anything about the suggestion that this might be in substitution for any other tax. It is true that for some years in Australia the States have been looking for some tax similar to the purchase tax that the American States impose. On a number of occasions I have indicated that with my limited knowledge of the law I believe that the High Court, in a decision some months ago in, I think, the H. C. Sleigh Ltd case, suggested that the States have the power to impose a turnover tax, which in many ways would be parallel to a sales tax or purchase tax, and that the States might be able to go ahead unilaterally if they desired to impose such a tax. After all, the States have a wide range of taxation instruments which they can use on their own volition and initiative. The States are main taxing agents. It is true that from time to time the States and the Commonwealth find it desirable to discuss means of rationalising taxation, and any discussion of this matter would be useful. However, I have had no official approach yet to have this matter listed for the discussion at the next Premiers Conference.
– I wish to ask a supplementary question. In view of the fact that the Minister has not had an opportunity to study Mr Hamer ‘s statement, will he undertake to do so and perhaps tomorrow in this chamber comment on behalf of his Government on that statement?
-Providing I can get the statement in time I will do that. If not tomorrow, then as soon as I possibly can after I have seen the text of the official statement I will be happy to do that.
page 1279
– I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport: Is it true that representatives of AUS Student Travel Service Pty Ltd exchanged students’ onward airline tickets for credit vouchers at Sydney Airport on 26 April? Is it also true, as reported in the Press, that AUS Student Travel was informed at least a week before then that arrangements it was making to sell a cheaper fare to Kuala Lumpur were a breach of the amended Air Navigation Regulations? Is it also true that AUS Student Travel has followed this type of fare construction for some time and is now doing so in defiance of instructions from the Department of Transport? What steps does the Minister for Transport intend taking to prevent AUS Student Travel from either continuing its present illegal practice or issuing credit vouchers at an airport which could later be exchanged for onward airline tickets overseas? Finally, I ask whether other travel agents, operating perhaps more legitimately, are to enjoy the same facilities and have access to the same practices as AUS Student Travel.
– On my calculation there were five parts to the question asked by Senator Baume. If I have them correctly, in answer to the first part of the question, I am informed that representatives of AUS Student Travel Service Pty Ltd did exchange students onward airline tickets for credit vouchers at Sydney Airport on 26 April, the date which Senator Baume indicated. As to the second part of the question, I understand it is true that the Department of Transport has been concerned about the arrangements made in Australia by AUS for travel beyond Kuala Lumpur. The problems do not arise from the actual sale of fares in Kuala Lumpur. As to the third part of the question, my understanding is that AUS Student Travel has pursued its own type of fare construction for some time and that there have been exchanges between it and the Department of Transport on this question. In reply to the fourth part of the question, I understand that the legal position with regard to credit vouchers is being examined and that the matter is being taken up with AUS Student Travel at present. Finally, Senator Baume asked whether the same conditions would apply to other travel agents. I have not been advised on this but I will find out and let the honourable senator know.
page 1279
-My question is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs. Was an organisation formed in Sydney last Sunday, by about 200 members of Sydney’s Vietnamese community, known as the New South Wales Chapter of the Greater Overseas Alliance for National Restoration of Vietnam which has as its aim the ultimate overthrow of the Government of Vietnam? Does the Government associate itself with or dissociate itself from this organisation and its objectives? Has the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs called for a report from his Department on the organisation? Bearing in mind the Government’s announced policy of providing for general freedom of information, will the Minister undertake to make the report available to the Parliament?
– I am unable to deal with the questions raised by Senator Douglas McClelland. I shall seek information from the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs or the Minister for Foreign Affairs and see that he is advised of whatever information is available.
page 1279
-Has the Minister representing the Minister for Transport seen reports that the services provided to certain isolated centres in the Kimberleys in Western Australia by MacRobertson Miller Airline Services are to be discontinued because of the removal of a Commonwealth subsidy of approximately $16,000? Are the reports correct? Is the Minister familiar with the isolated situation and difficult terrain which make transport in the Kimberleys both difficult and expensive? Will the Minister have the matter examined to ensure that the communities concerned will not lose essential transport services?
– I have not seen such a report but my information is that there has been no withdrawal of subsidies from that airline. That is without qualification. I am well aware of the conditions in isolated areas in the part of the State which Senator Chaney mentioned. There is certainly a need for an efficient airline in that area and it may well be that some form of subsidy is necessary to achieve it. If there is any need to add to that answer, which is unqualified, I shall refer the question to the Minister for Transport and seek any further information.
page 1280
– My question, which is directed to the Minister for Social Security, refers to the alleged social security frauds which are currently the subject of court cases in Sydney. How many people have been charged with conspiracy to defraud the Commonwealth? How many benefit payments or pension payments have been suspended as a result of these investigations? Is the prediction of Inspector Thomas on 3 April, the day the charges were first laid, that 1000 people would be charged, likely to be fulfilled?
– I have not with me the precise figures on those matters. I think I can obtain them for Senator Grimes before the end of Question Time. With relation to the last question, I am unable to say whether the prediction that 1000 people would be arrested is accurate. As I understand it, some arrests are still being made. I shall seek the figures and if possible I shall make them available before the end of Question Time.
page 1280
– I address a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs. I refer to a report in the Melbourne Age of 25 April which comments on the Minister’s refusal to approve a film being produced by Film Australia. Is the report correct in stating that a grant for a film based on the novel The Unknown Industrial Prisoner has been vetoed by the Minister? Is it true that the Australian Film Commission and many distinguished members of the film industry believe that the film is commercially viable and worthy of production? If the film is not to receive a grant, will the Minister state for what specific reason the financial assistance has been refused?
– I had some discussion with the Minister for Home Affairs about the matter which has been raised by Senator Missen. As I understand it, the Minister expects to make a statement on the matter today. I am unable to pre-empt that statement. I shall see that Senator
Missen is advised on the matter raised in his question.
page 1280
– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Productivity. It is prompted by the national campaign in the United States to alert people in all industries who are involved with asbestos in packing and insulation to a broad campaign to detect any respiratory diseases. I ask the Minister: Does the Australian Government contemplate taking parallel action to the extent of holding summit meetings of all State Ministers of Labour and Industry? Also, will the Minister give an assurance that any interim action already taken will not be confined to men in the asbestos mining industry but will take into account people in other industries that use asbestos for packing and insulation?
– The machinery for consultation between the Commonwealth and the States on health matters is the National Health and Medical Research Council. This body has already issued three documents dealing with the health hazards of asbestos and associated cautionary measures. I am also informed that the National Health and Medical Research Council will be meeting again in June to consider the approval of further codes covering the handling of asbestos. I have with me details of the documents issued by the Council, but I do not see a need to read them all out.
There is good liaison between the Departments of Health of the Commonwealth and the States and the Departments of Labour and Industry in relation to these matters and the appropriate measures to be used in the handling of asbestos in the work place. As I understand it, there is no specific proposal, as suggested by Senator Mulvihill in his question, in regard to a meeting of Ministers themselves, but I think it is clear from what I have been saying that constant consultation is going on at officer level between the Commonwealth and the States. As well, consideration is being given to this matter by the Commonwealth-State body- the National Health and Medical Research Council. I shall refer the specific matter of a meeting of Ministers to the Minister for Productivity and ask him to give consideration to that, too.
page 1280
-I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Transport whether his attention has been drawn to a report concerning serious criticism by an officer of the Department of Transport of the electronic equipment at Adelaide Airport. Is the Minister aware that the report describes the equipment as obsolescent and bordering on the obsolete and claims that the equipment is nearing the end of its economic life and, in truth, is the worst of any such equipment at any Australian airport? Has the Minister examined the text of the claims by the officer of the Department of Transport? Is the Minister aware that such claims are of public concern and disquiet? Will the Minister give assurances that any deficiencies will receive attention which will remove a condition which I would describe as of considerable danger?
– I have not seen the media report to which Senator Davidson has referred and I should be grateful to him if in due course he would let me have a copy of the text so that I can put it under study. Therefore I cannot respond on this matter at first hand. But I am bound to say that whilst there may be need for continual upgrading of the equipment, the general belief, based on hard experience, is that the electronic equipment at airports in Australia is of world standard and that the Department concerned and the officers who service it maintain exceptionally high standards. Indeed, it is fair to say that the safety rate of travel and the efficiency of operation bear that out. It may well be that certain matters need scrutiny. I shall ask the Minister for Transport to look at the media article, put it under study and make a response.
– The statement has been denied.
- Senator Young intervenes to inform me that the statement has been denied. If that is so, it confirms my own understanding of the matter. In any case, as this matter is of importance to all air travellers- I appreciate the concern of Senator Davidson in this regard- I shall have the matter studied and in due course let the Senate as a whole know the result of that study.
page 1281
-I refer the Minister for Administrative Services to a statement made in the other place by the Prime Minister on 1 3 April that the Government would not make any decisions on implementing the report by Sir Robert Mark concerning the organisation of police resources in the Commonwealth area until it had fully studied the report. In view of the fact that the review of protective security to be undertaken by Mr Justice Hope will include a review of the relationship between State, Territorial and Commonwealth police and in view of the fact that Mr Justice Hope is presently calling for public submissions, may we assume that the Government will make no decision on the Mark report until the second Hope report has been presented and made public?
– The honourable senator may be right, but he may be wrong. Naturally the inquiry upon which Mr Justice Hope is about to embark will affect some aspects of the Mark report. Whilst the terms of reference of the two inquiries have some inter-relationship there are some matters which are not totally inter-related. I hope to receive shortly responses from various other arms of government throughout Australia in respect of some specific examples of Sir Robert Mark ‘s report after they have had time to study it. Whilst it may be true that some aspects cannot be resolved until Mr Justice Hope’s report is before the Government, it may well be that some areas can be resolved before then.
page 1281
– I preface my question, which I direct to the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, by saying that the Queensland Government has now introduced its Local Government (Aboriginal Lands) Bill 1978. In view of that fact, can the Minister assure the Senate that consultation will take place between the Federal Government and the councils of both Aurukun and Mornington Island before any decision is made by the Federal Government in relation to this iniquitous piece of legislation of the Queensland Government?
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has now seen the Bill which was introduced into the Queensland Parliament. It is under investigation by the Federal Government and some interpretation is being sought from the Queensland Government. Consultation with the two communities has always been in the forefront of the Federal Government’s approach to this matter, inasmuch as we are seeking to protect the rights of the people of those communities to determine the way in which they shall live in the future. So that consultation is of primary importance to us. At the moment we are conferring with the Queensland Government. I understand that later this week a meeting is to take place between Ministers of the Queensland Government and the Commonwealth Government to discuss the Bill which was introduced into the
Queensland Parliament. I can assure the honourable senator that as a result of that meeting further consultations will need to be held with the communities concerned.
page 1282
– I direct my question to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs. The Minister may remember that on 22 February I asked him a question relating to the status of the so-called Arab Information Bureau and the consequence of individuals being placed on what is described as the black-list of that bureau. On 4 April I asked him whether the Government had considered making a plea for clemency on behalf of the former Prime Minister of Pakistan who is at present under sentence of death. Since well over two months have passed since the first question was asked and nearly one month has passed since the second question was asked, I wonder whether the Minister could ask whoever writes the answers to these questions whether we are likely to receive an answer to the first question before the end of this sessional period and whether we are likely to receive an answer to the second question before the proposed date of Mr Bhutto ‘s execution.
-I regret that I have not been able to answer the honourable senator’s questions before this date. I recall seeing some report after the honourable senator asked his question that the Arab Information Bureau had put the honourable senator on another list. Whether it was black, white, red or green, I do not know. Evidently it is quite angry at being exposed for what it is. I will chase up that matter. As to the second question, I will have to check with my office. I have it in the back of my mind that I did attempt to give some information on this matter and that the situation was, basically, that the Government had decided not to do anything at this stage because Mr Bhutto’s sentence was under appeal to a higher judicial authority.
– The Foreign Minister has made representations.
-Yes. As I recall it, I said in effect that the Government was going to await the outcome of the appeal that Mr Bhutto had made to a superior court before it made further representations on the matter. I will check on that matter to see whether I can give the honourable senator more information.
page 1282
– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations. I refer to an article in today’s Adelaide Advertiser stating that 53 Noarlunga meat workers have been retrenched at the request of their union, the Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union. Is the Minister aware of this action and the statement by the managing director of the company that the Federal Secretary of the AMIEU had told him in Canberra on 19 April this year that the men would be better off receiving unemployment benefits than working a 2-day or 3-day week? I understand that the union contends that the daily hired workers were earning less than the unemployment benefits for which they were ineligible because they were employed. Is the Minister aware that last year the meat workers were prepared to work on a short week basis? I ask the Minister: What is the Government’s attitude to this move and to the precedent that this action may set?
-The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations has had his attention drawn to this matter. He has indicated his very great concern that employers and unions could co-operate in such a way as to secure unemployment benefits artificially. Provisions exist for the payment of unemployment benefits and provide that an individual may earn an additional $6 a week, after which his or her entitlement for unemployment benefit is reduced by $1 for each $1 earned. The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations is having urgent investigations made into the allegations that were referred to by Senator Jessop. He will discuss them with the Minister for Social Security as soon as possible.
page 1282
– My question is directed to the Minister for Social Security and follows from the question asked by Senator Jessop. I was informed some weeks ago that applications for unemployment benefits had been sent to Canberra and to the Minister for Social Security by those meat workers in South Australia who had been stood down or whose employment had been terminated because of the meat workers’ strike. Their entitlement to benefits would have been dependent upon what the Minister for Social Security decided in that matter. I now ask the Minister: Is it a fact that those applications were sent to her and her Department for consideration? Was consideration of the applications held up pending the settlement of the dispute to which I referred? Does the Minister agree that as a settlement has been reached between all parties concerned in that matter, including the Australian Government, it should now be possible to determine whether the applications of these meat workers should be considered favourably? Collusion could not be suggested in the case of applications which, as I understand it, have been outstanding for five weeks. Can the Minister inform the Senate of the position in respect of those applications?
– I am advised with regard to claims for unemployment benefits from members of the Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union that the Director-General has decided that members of the AMIEU who were stood down as the result of the shortage of work are to be granted unemployment benefits subject to the normal conditions. Members of the AMIEU who were on strike at various times during the currency of the dispute are not to be granted unemployment benefits during any period when they were actually on strike. As was implied by Senator Bishop, the dispute has been settled and the determinations will be made in the manner I have described. I understand that the determinations are being facilitated. The matters should be clarified and dealt with as speedily as possible.
page 1283
– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Health. Last week there was a report in the media that Aboriginal child mortality had increased in the Northern Territory in the last calendar year from 50 deaths to 75 deaths per 1,000 children. This has brought a spate of opinions from many experts. In view of this report regarding child mortality, can the Minister give further information as to what the authorities recognise as the problems and what action has been taken in an effort to reduce the number of deaths each year? Will the Minister advise the Senate of the cause of these deaths and whether the deaths are more pronounced in certain areas? If so, will the Minister give full information covering, say, the last 10 years?
– I am not able to provide that information now, but I will ensure that the various matters raised by Senator Kilgariff are referred to the Minister and I will seek an early answer from him. I believe that much of the information that has been requested can be made available. I will see that it is expedited.
page 1283
– My question, which is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry, refers to a statement on merino ram exports made by the Minister for Primary Industry at Deniliquin some weeks ago. I ask: Does the Government propose to remove the embargo on ram exports notwithstanding the decision of the 1973 wool growers referendum? If so, is the Government re- endorsing the export policy put forward in the 1967 White Paper of the Australian Wool Board, including the motion that increased wool production would lead to higher wool prices? If not, what is the Government’s rationale for allowing exports?
-The Government is well aware of the situation relating to the export of sheep generally and is particularly aware of the existence of merino export bans. The Government has been looking at this matter over the last month or two. Generally, the Government wishes to see the free export of a product owned by a producer. However, there are considerations to be taken into account. So far as I am aware the matter is still before Cabinet for decision. I do not think I can add valuably to the query of the honourable senator about particular reports. I will seek an answer from the Minister whom I represent in this chamber and give it to the honourable senator.
– I wish to ask a supplementary question. If the Minister who in this chamber represents the Minister for Primary Industry cannot supply the answer now I would appreciate it if he could let me know sooner or later whether the Government still accepts the hypothesis of the Australian Wool Board that increased wool production would induce higher wool prices.
– I will attempt to get that information. I think the honourable senator’s supplementary question does not relate to his original question. I will attempt to get answers to both questions for him.
page 1283
-I think I accept the question under false colours. It ought to be directed to my colleague who represents the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations. It is, of course, an arbitral matter. I will refer the substance of the question to the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations.
page 1284
– I ask the Minister for Education whether he is aware of the proposal by the Canberra College of Advanced Education to withdraw the Italian translator interpreter course from the course of studies at the end of 1978. Does the Minister agree that there is a need throughout Australia for more trained interpreters and translators to work in the delivery of migrant services? Will the Minister call for a report from the Canberra College of Advanced Education on the proposed withdrawal of the Italian course with a view to taking any necessary steps to retain the course?
– I saw some comment on this matter. I have, but not here, some background information which could be interpreted as a report. If I can I shall give the information to Senator Ryan by the end of Question Time. If not, I shall make sure I do so in the near future.
page 1284
-I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations: On what terms was the Trans-Australia Airlines air pilots ‘ strike settled, particularly in relation to the amount of increase in wage rates for the upper echelon of pilots? Was any wage indexation applied parallel to that which is being applied to lower wage earners in the conciliation and arbitration field?
– I do not know whether I have the full details of the settlement as requested by Senator Wright but I have some information about it which I think will be of interest to him and the Senate. The dispute finally boiled down to three main issues. The first was concerned with equipment assignments and commuting, the second with alterations to the work bid system, and the third with pay and associated matters. It was agreed that the proposed changes to the bid system would be put to a task force to study over six months and that it would be implemented provided the study showed TAA’s flexibility of operation was not affected and there was no significant additional cost. The question of commuting was withdrawn. Throughout the discussions TAA was adamant, as it stated publicly, that there was room for negotiations on the third issue, namely, pay and associated matters, provided it came within wage indexation guidelines. In the process of reaching agreement these limitations were observed.
In the final settlement there were some changes in the incremental structure of the pay system, but I do not have the details, and to the bid system. It is believed that most, pilots will gain a little extra pay but just how the result will wash up when changes in other areas are considered is not clear. However, the important thing to emphasise is that any increases in pay must be within indexation guidelines- the guidelines have been accepted- and that TAA has announced that it will not increase fares as a result of the settlement.
– May I persevere- I hope without appearing to be importunate- to try to get the figures. There seems to be a conspiracy in the media to conceal them. What I want to know is: How much more money a pilot on $35,000 a year, for instance, has got out of this boycott strike?
– I prefaced my answer to Senator Wright by saying that I did not have the specific details. I shall endeavour to obtain them in view of his persisting with that request.
page 1284
– I address my question to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry. The Minister will recall that on 1 3 April I posed to him a question regarding the export of merino rams. My question today follows a similar question asked by Senator Walsh. Today the Minister said in reply that Cabinet was still considering its attitude to the export of merino rams. Does this mean that if Cabinet decides to lift the embargo it will do so without first consulting wool growers by way of referendum? A referendum was held when the embargo was imposed.
– I do not think that in my answer earlier about the export of merino rams I used the words that Senator McLaren said I used. The Cabinet has been considering this matter over the past few months. I am unable to say exactly what is the present state of that consideration. I indicated that I was aware that generally the Government felt that the free export of goods produced in Australia should be allowed and that this situation was being reviewed because of the fact that there had been some union intervention in the matter previously and because of certain reports that have been brought forward. Senator McLaren asked whether the fact that the Cabinet is considering this matter means that it may reach a decision on the matter without holding a referendum, as was done originally. Senator McLaren described what took place under the Labor Government as a referendum. Some people may challenge whether it was a true referendum.
– Why would you challenge it?
– We must consider which individuals should have a say in a referendum. I do not doubt that Senator Wriedt fully agrees with me on that. It is not for me to say whether the Minister for Primary Industry, whom I represent in this place, would suggest that there should be a referendum before the present situation was changed. That would be a matter for consideration by the Government. I will inform the honourable senator as best I can after I have referred the question to the Minister for Primary Industry.
page 1285
– My question is directed to the Minister for Education. The Minister may recall that on 2 March last I asked him a question relating to graduate employment and whether the Department of Education kept statistics on the number of university graduates who were unable to obtain employment in their chosen profession immediately after graduation. I asked further whether, if there were statistics, the Minister could in general terms indicate the faculties with high rates of graduates unable to find employment in their particular profession. I also asked the Minister whether, if there were no such statistics, he would have inquiries made at the various universities with a view to reviewing the intake in faculties where a significant number of graduates were unable to be employed in their profession after graduation. In his reply the Minister stated that he would obtain these figures. I now ask the Minister whether he is in a position to give the figures to the Senate.
– I understand the interest that Senator Tehan and, I think, all Australians have in this matter and I do have some information on it. The Tertiary Education Commission has provided me with the following information: Statistics on the number of university graduates who are unable to obtain employment are published in the publication of the Graduate Careers Council entitled ‘First Destinations of 1976 University and College Graduates’. That publication sets out the results of the most recent annual survey conducted by the Graduate Careers Council of Australia in respect of university and college graduates seeking, but unable to obtain, full time employment in their first year following graduation. Tables in it show the percentages of 1976 first degree university and first degree-diploma college graduates who, at 30 April 1977, were still seeking full time employment. These percentages are broken down into the major subjects studied. The survey is based on all university graduates and 40 per cent of the college graduates who qualified for awards in 1 976. The results are based on a response rate of 79 percent of university graduates and 58.5 per cent of the sampled college graduates. I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard two tables setting out the Tertiary Education Commission’s information on graduate unemployment.
Leave granted.
The tables read as follows-
– In summary, 1.9 per cent of the sample of first degree university graduates were casually employed and seeking full time employment. In addition, 4.4 per cent were unemployed and seeking full time employment. Therefore, the total of first degree university graduates seeking full time employment one year after graduation was 6.3 per cent. For first degree-diploma college graduates the comparable figures were 2. 1 per cent and 3.5 per cent respectively, giving a total of 5.6 per cent seeking full time employment a year after graduation. However, it appears that employment prospects for graduates still remain better than for the population as a whole. A survey carried out by the Australian Bureau of Statistics in May 1977 estimated that approximately 6,500 graduates were seeking work at that time. The Tertiary Education Commission estimates that there were approximately a quarter of a million people with university or college degrees in the labour force in 1977. The number of unemployed graduates was thus approximately 2.6 per cent of the total number with graduate qualifications. The level of unemployment for the labour force generally at that time was 5.1 per cent. Unemployment among persons aged 20 years and over was about 3.6 per cent. Therefore, unemployment among degree holders is about three-quarters of the rate for the adult population generally. Unemployment among school leavers in May 1977 was estimated to be 16.3 percent.
page 1287
– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and relates to the question asked by Senator Douglas McClelland concerning the formation of a group of Vietnamese refugees whose explicit intention is the overthrow of the Vietnamese Government. Is the Minister concerned that the setting up of such a group in Australia could severely hamper our diplomatic and trade relations with the present Government of Vietnam? Further, what would be the attitude of his Government if the group in question operated a radio broadcasting unit in order to maintain contacts with groups inside Vietnam?
-I will seek that information for the honourable senator.
page 1287
-I ask the Minister for Education whether the Government is concerned that a substantial proportion of the academic staff of the Australian National University are likely to remain in their positions during the next twenty years? Has this been caused by the fact that a large percentage of the current academic staff hold tenured appointments, that is, appointments for life? Will the Government give further consideration to the question of tenured appointments in the post-secondary institutions that come under its control, and introduce guidelines in this matter?
– One of the results of a country such as Australia having an extraordinarily rapid population growth, both for natural reasons and from immigration, which then slows down, is a sudden burgeoning for a number of years of academic staff appointments. When the population becomes stable, a state of staff stagnation, as it were, is reached in particular institutions, largely because of the absence of opportunity to transfer, or for new staff to be appointed. That is a fundamental happening at the moment in Australia. One hopes that our population will not remain stagnant and that we are passing through a period during which this Borrie-type phenomenon will change. It nevertheless is the fact that we have taken in an enormous number of academic staff and that quite a degree of inertia in that respect can now be expected.
It is true that over the years tenure, or the employment of an academic in an institution virtually for life, has become a characteristic of such institutions, but in recent years more and more universities have been initially taking staff in on a short-term or probationary basis. There is emerging also a contract system under which, for a certain number of years, academics must prove themselves. Thus, there is a series of stages involving probation, contract and tenure. The subject of tenure is under study throughout the world. In Australia we are examining it, but not in relation to the immediate future, except to note the emergence of probation and contracts as such. The Government has many other matters in this field under study at the moment but it would be happy to take a harder look at the matter raised by the honourable senator to see whether any further information can be supplied to him.
page 1287
– I preface my question to the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry by reminding him that some months ago all the birds in a private aviary at Cairns were destroyed because of a suspected outbreak of Newcastle disease. An outbreak of an apparently infectious disease has now occurred in a flock of pelicans at Cairns but the representatives of the State Department of Primary Industries will not take action in the matter. Will the Minister inform the Parliament whether the Commonwealth Department of Primary Industry will take urgent action to investigate the matter to ascertain whether the pelicans are infected with Newcastle disease or some other transmittable disease?
-The honourable senator has given information of which I am unaware. I have heard of some problem relating to disease in Queensland but I was not aware of the matters that he mentioned. This primarily would be a matter for the State authority to look at, though it could be considered to be a matter of particular interest to the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation to establish whether there were some disease there. Perhaps the Minister for Primary Industry has some information on the matter. I will attempt to get it today and will give it to the honourable senator.
page 1288
– My question is directed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate and concerns the compulsory wearing for security reasons of identity cards by people moving within Parliament House and their voluntary wearing by some members of parliament. Will the Minister give consideration to the issuing of parliamentary lapel badges to senators and members as a method of recognition, as is the practice in some parliaments overseas?
– How about a toga?
-Senator Georges would look well in one. I do not know whether he would look like Augustus or Claudius.
– Claudius.
– I can see a couple of Livias around.
– Oh!
-I am not referring to Senator Ryan. I know from what honourable senators have told me that members of the Japanese Diet are issued with lapel badges.
– What do we need them for?
-I do not know that Senator Young is definitely putting this forward as a means of identification. Already members of parliament are issued with an identification medallion. I think that is what it is called at the moment. It is what the late former senator Harry
Cant always referred to as the ‘bludger’s badge’. That was his description of it; it is not mine. I will give consideration to what the honourable senator has suggested. Senator Ryan should not shake her head like that. It would not be compulsory to wear it. If she wanted to wear hers between her toes that would be a matter for her.
page 1288
– I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications: Is it a fact that the Government has printed forms to enable it to introduce licences for coloured television sets?
– I am sorry to disillusion the honourable senator. The answer is that it is not a fact at all.
page 1288
– My question, which I direct to the Minister for Science, relates to the adoption by the International Civil Aviation Organisation of InterScan, the aircraft landing system invented and developed by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation and the Department of Transport. Can the Minister give me an assurance that Australian business and Australians generally will be the main beneficiaries of the manufacture and fitting of this system following its worldwide adoption? Can the Minister give me an estimate of the financial benefit to Australia?
– I should imagine that all Australians were particularly pleased with the announcement about a week ago that InterScan had been selected as the future worldwide landing system for civil aviation. That decision reflected enormous credit on the quality of scientific research in Australia, particularly that conducted by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation in conjunction with the Department of Transport and the Department of Productivity. We feel that our research has reached a very high standard and this is reflected in world scientific circles. The honourable senator has asked two difficult questions. He has asked whether I can assure him that Australian industry will reap a very significant benefit from the production of this system. Some time ago the Government made a very definite decision- and did so greatly to its credit in a time of financial restraint- to allocate money to industry to pursue research into the refinement of certain of the hardware associated with the Interscan development. It was a difficult decision to make but the Government took it. Undoubtedly, it has lifted the electronic capability of industry in Australia.
It is very difficult to say at present how much competition manufacturing industry in this country will face from countries such as the United States, Japan, Russia and perhaps the United Kingdom when the production of the software and hardware for this instrument commences. The Department of Productivity has some responsibility in this area in Australia. I understand that a very high level group from the United States of America is in Australia at present discussing the development, perhaps on a joint basis with Australia, of features of this system.
I am unable to suggest what the income to Australia may be from production in this field. It has been suggested to me that thousands of millions of dollars worth of equipment may need to be installed. Of course, when we convert to the system within Australia we should have prime responsibility for the installation of our own type of manufacture. I hope that we will also be able to achieve much of the work for overseas.
page 1289
– My question to the Minister for Science follows the one which has just been asked. In view of the waffling answer just given which indicates that the Government has no plans to protect Australia’s interest in the development of this new equipment, is it a fact that it was Senator Webster who said in this chamber some months ago- I cannot recall the exact date- that Australian scientists were the first to investigate and undertake years of development on the InterScan system? Is it not plain from that that InterScan would not have been developed without the Australian initiative and research, for which we all commend the people involved? Is that not sufficient ground for the Minister to deny reports that the present deputation from the United States is here virtually to tell us how InterScan will be developed and that Australian industry might receive 10 per cent of the total production of the InterScan system? As the Minister has had so much to say about InterScan in the past 12 months, can he now say on behalf of the Government that what has been developed in this country will receive proper recognition and that the Australian Government will stand by it irrespective of the pressures from United States companies?
– I apologise to the honourable senator if my last answer appeared to be waffling. I have noted that the honourable senator’s memory appears to leave him when he tries to recall some of the things which have been said in the Senate previously. However, we have to put up with that situation and acknowledge the ability that some senators have. The honourable senator will be aware that this matter has been progressing over a number of years. The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation first developed the idea of the Time Reference Scanning Beam, the TRSB system, which is being pursued. Senator Wriedt may recall that in March 1977 the all weather operations panel of the International Civil Aviation Organisation recommended that the next international standard approach and landing guidance system for aircraft should be of this type. At that time both Australia and the United States of America had proposed a time reference scanning beam system to ICAO. The Australian proposal featured an InterScan system which had been designed by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation and developed jointly by the Department of Transport and the CSIRO over at least a 5-year period. The particular recommendation to which I referred was placed before a world-wide meeting of ICAO for endorsement in April of this year.
Questions have been asked in this place over the past year about the progress of InterScan, but it was not until that meeting came about that we were able to claim cautiously that we might have some success. Indeed, we faced notable opposition to the proposal from the United Kingdom and other countries which had developed the Doppler system and which I understand had invested millions of dollars in that system. Once the world-wide meeting had taken place and had accepted the proposed system, the next step was the development of the system and the refinement of the electronics which would be used. The point is that for some time it has been a joint development by the United States of America and Australia.
– For some time.
-For some time.
– But not in the initial stages.
-Not in the initial stages. Senator Wriedt is saying: ‘Why was it not possible for Australia to put forward its own proposal and perhaps to hold the patents of a particular proposal to itself?’ People have all sorts of ways of going about business. While the Labor Party was in office it demonstrated very effectively to this country the way in which it would go about its particular business. That should be to its everlasting shame. It must be recognised that it was while the Labor Party was in office that arrangements such as I have outlined were being made.
– We were not selling it out, though- like you are doing now.
-That is a comment I think we could well take up. We will see when the negotiations were started on this matter. However, it would be wise at the present time for joint operations to take place. For instance, as I understand it, more than 50 per cent of the whole of the installations in the United States will be of this type of system. I think it would be very foolish for this country to believe that it would be able to deliver its system to the United States in that volume. It is a very wise proposition to be involved in joint operations with the United States and I am pleased that we are so involved.
- Mr President, I wish to ask a supplementary question. The Minister for Science apparently is unable to recall just what he did say. I ask him whether he recalls saying on 30 March last year in reply to a question by Senator Tehan:
This system -
That is, InterScan- was conceived at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation Division of Radio Physics. It has been developed jointly by CSIRO and the Department of Transport during the past five years.
I further ask the Minister whether he recalls the following interjection by Senator Young:
It is purely Australian research, is it?
I also asked the Minister whether he recalls saying:
Australia was working on this microwave landing system long before any other nation.
Again I ask the Minister: In view of the firmness of that statement and recognising that American technology may be required in the development of InterScan, can he not give the Senate an assurance that the Australian Government will protect Australian industry and Australian interest in this whole proposal?
-The Leader of the Opposition has asked me whether the Australian Government will protect Australian interests and Australian industry in this regard. I think the Australian Government has adopted a very sensible attitude in relation to this matter, one which any deep thinking person would support. The fact is that it is wise for us to be associated with the United States of America. The honourable senator may know that the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics came in behind the United States of America and Australia in regard to this matter. Quite recently West Germany came into the formation of a group whereby this system could be adopted.
It is acknowledged that the original system was a CSIRO research finding. As far as development and Australian industry are concerned, the Government has supplied funds for the development of the system. I think we will stand in a very good situation in relation to it. The very fact that representatives of the United States are in Australia to discuss with us some of the developments indicates that a very major user is going to seek Australia’s assistance and that we will mutually benefit from it.
page 1290
– I direct my question to the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Resources. Does the Minister know or could he ascertain whether as a result of recent ministerial discussions any changes were made to arrangements in trading with New Zealand under the New Zealand-Australia Free Trade Agreement that would either advantage or disadvantage Australian producers of cheese, vegetables, timber or paper pulp?
– I do not have the exact detail for which the honourable senator asks. However, I will see whether I can obtain it for him by tomorrow.
page 1290
– I direct my question to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign AfFairs. As a result of last week’s meeting between the Minister for Foreign Affairs and his Papua New Guinea counterpart, have the two governments been able to resolve the issue of the border between Australia and Papua New Guinea? Has the Foreign Minister agreed to the boundary being moved to the south of the existing boundary between the two countries? Finally, can the Minister assure the Senate that in the event of any change taking place, the interests of Australian residents living on islands in the Torres Strait will be fully protected?
-I cannot give the honourable senator an answer to the latter part of his question because I do not have a brief on that. However, I can answer the former pan as follows: The Foreign Minister conferred with Mr Olewale, the Papua New Guinea Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, from 26 to 29 April to resume negotiations on maritime boundaries between the two countries and on other issues relating to the Torres Strait. The discussions were useful and constructive. Considerable progress was made towards the objective of achieving an equitable and permanent settlement. At the end of the meeting it was agreed that it would now be appropriate to report to the respective governments on the discussions and that the Ministers should meet again in the near future to carry their negotiations forward. Beyond that, I cannot help the honourable senator.
page 1291
-Earlier today Senator Wheeldon drew my attention to the fact that he believed I had not answered a question he had asked earlier about the former Prime Minister of Pakistan. Senator Missen was good enough to draw my attention to a document published by the Department of Foreign Affairs known as Backgrounder for the week ending 21 April 1978. According to that publication, my colleague Mr Peacock in answer to a question asked by Dr Edwards in the House of Representatives on 13 April 1978 said:
But, having considered all those factors, I instructed our Ambassador to make representation on behalf of the Australian Government to the Pakistan Ministry of Foreign Affairs seeking commutation of the death sentence.
page 1291
– Earlier today I promised to give information on two matters. The first matter arose from Senator Davidson’s question on electronic equipment at Adelaide Airport. I am now advised that the person reported, a Mr Schofield, had been giving evidence before the Public Works Committee, and the purpose of the evidence was to obtain approval for expenditure amounting to $5. 8m for new buildings and equipment. The expenditure of that money is to include a new air traffic control tower, a new area approach centre and a new flight service centre at Adelaide Airport. This is evidence, of course, of the Government’s intention to modernise those facilities to the extent possible. I am also advised, as I have stated, that the existing equipment is completely safe and trustworthy.
page 1291
- Senator Ryan asked me about an interpreters and translators course at the Canberra College of Advanced Education. The Principal of that College, Dr Richardson, has informed me that the College Council at its meeting on 26 April resolved that the course should be suspended on the completion of the present course. The Council’s decision was made in the context that enrolments had declined steadily during the four years in which the course had been offered and that this year it attracted only three students. The reasons for the decline in enrolment probably lie in the fact that tertiary institutions in Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide are now offering courses in Italian and, since these cities have major concentrations of Italian migrants and since the Government has been assisting people to enrol in these courses by offering them the facilities of the National Employment and Training scheme, prospective students have naturally tended to enrol in their own capital cities.
It is interesting to note that the Spanish course in interpreting at the CAE has continued to attract a good enrolment, presumably because a similar course has not been offered elsewhere in Australia. I am advised that it may turn out that the Council on Interpreting and Translating, established by the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, will recommend that the College should move into some other field of interpreting and translating where there is scope for a single national course rather than provide facilities in the States. If this happens, the College Council is prepared to give very careful consideration to the possibilities of reintroducing a second stream in interpreting in some language other than Italian or Greek. The College has advised me that it considers an assured enrolment of about 10 students annually to be a viable proposition and it does not feel that it can secure such an enrolment in Italian now that courses are readily available in Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide. Finally, it does not believe that it should maintain two academics for three students.
page 1291
Senator GUILFOYLEEarlier today I undertook to Senator Grimes to obtain some figures which he requested in a question that he directed to me relating to the investigations in New South Wales by the Commonwealth Police. I am advised that the number of people who have been charged totals 176. Of this number, there are 125 sickness beneficiaries, 32 invalid pensioners, nine agents and six doctors, and four persons in a category which I am not sure of because the latest arrests were made this morning. A number of people have been requested to attend the Department of Social Security for interview to determine their continuing eligibility for pension or benefit. This number includes those who have been charged, which is a total of 741. This number is broken up into 448 sickness beneficiaries and 293 invalid pensioners. Included in that figure of 293 are 138 persons who are living in Greece. Other cases which are still under investigation total 264.I understand they are all sickness beneficiaries. I will read the question that was directed to me by Senator Grimes. If there are other matters on which he has sought information which I have not supplied I will see that it is given to him.
page 1292
Assent to the following Bills reported:
Crimes (Foreign Incursions and Recruitment) Bill 1 978.
Evidence Amendment Bill 1978.
States Grants (Petroleum Products) Amendment Bill 1978.
Australian Apple and Pear Corporation Amendment Bill 1978.
Co-operative Farmers and Graziers Direct Meat Supply Limited (Loan Guarantee) Bill 1978.
Superannuation Acts Amendment Bill 1 978.
page 1292
– Pursuant to section 28 of the Broadcasting and Television Act 1942 I present the annual report of the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal for the period 1 January to 30 June 1977 which incorporates the annual report of the Australian Broadcasting Control Board for the period 1 July to 31 December 1976.
page 1292
– For the information of honourable senators I present the annual report of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs for the year ended 30 June 1977.
-by leave- I move:
I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later stage.
Leave granted; debate adjourned.
page 1292
– Pursuant to section 8 of the Fishing Industry Act 1956 I present the twenty-first annual report on the operation of that Act during the year ended 30 June 1977.
page 1292
– Pursuant to section 19 of the Fishing Industry Research Act 1969 I present the eighth annual report of the Fishing Industry Research Committee for the year ended 30 June 1977.
page 1292
– For the information of honourable senators I present the monthly report of the Darwin Cyclone Tracy Relief Trust Fund for March 1978.
page 1292
Senator DURACK (Western AustraliaAttorneyGeneral) For the information of honourable senators I present the report of the fourth International Trade Law Seminar held in Canberra in April 1977.
page 1292
Senator DURACK (Western AustraliaAttorneyGeneral) For the information of honourable senators I present the report of the Temporary Assistance Authority on thin wood based panels.
page 1292
Senator DURACK (Western AustraliaAttorneyGeneral) For the information of honourable senators I present the report of the Industries Assistance Commission on razors, razor blades and razor blade blanks.
page 1292
– For the information of honourable senators I present the report of the Industries Assistance Commission on export incentives.
page 1292
-( Western AustraliaLeader of the Government in the Senate)- I lay on the table the particulars of proposed additional expenditure for the service of the year ending 30 June 1978 and the particulars of certain proposed additional expenditure in respect of the year ending on 30 June 1978.
Motion (by Senator Withers)- by leaveagreed to:
– I also table explanatory notes in respect of each department for use in Estimates committees. Copies of the notes have already been distributed to honourable senators.
page 1293
Motion (by Senator Withers)- by leaveagreed to:
That the sitting of the Senate be suspended until IS minutes past 10 p.m. or such earlier time as the President may take the chair to enable Estimates Committees A, B and C to meet.
– The sitting of the Senate is suspended until IS minutes past 10 p.m. or such earlier time as the President may take the chair to enable Estimates Committees A, B and C to meet. Estimates Committee A will meet in the Senate chamber; Estimates Committee B will meet in Committee Room No. 1; and Estimates Committee C will meet in Committee Room No. 5. The bells will be rung for two minutes prior to the meetings of the committees.
Sitting suspended from 3.49 to 10.15 p.m.
page 1293
Message received from the House of Representatives intimating that it had agreed to the amendment made by the Senate to this Bill.
page 1293
Bills received from the House of Representatives.
Suspension of Standing Orders
Motion (by Senator Carrick) agreed to:
That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent the questions with regard to the several stages for the passage through the Senate of the Airline Equipment (Loan Guarantee) Bill 1978 and the Qantas Airways Limited (Loan Guarantee) Bill 1978 being put in one motion at each stage and the consideration of such Bills together in Committee of the Whole.
Ordered that the Bills may be taken through all their stages without delay.
Bills (on motion by Senator Carrick) together read a first time.
– I move:
I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in Hansard.
Leave granted.
The speeches read as follows-
Airline Equipment (Loan Guarantee) Bill 1978
The purpose of this Bill is to authorise the Treasurer, on behalf of the Commonwealth, to guarantee loans raised by Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd to finance the purchase of one Boeing 727-200 series aircraft. Traffic growth on the domestic network has revived over the last 12 months and an additional B727-200 aircraft is required by both Trans-Australia Airlines and Ansett Airlines of Australia to meet the anticipated increase in demand. The proposed Government guarantee will be limited to an amount of $US10.3m or its equivalent. This amount represents 80 per cent of the total cost of the aircraft and associated equipment.
It has been long standing practice for the Commonwealth to grant such guarantees and it is proposed that this practice be continued. The Company will be required to consult with the Treasurer on the form of documentation for any loans negotiated and on the terms and conditions on which monies are borrowed. Also, the Company will be required to satisfy the Treasurer that adequate and proper security is given to the Commonwealth over the aircraft. I commend the Bill to the Senate.
Qantas Airways Limited (Loan Guarantee) Bill 1978
The purpose of this Bill is to authorise the Treasurer, on behalf of the Commonwealth, to guarantee loans raised by Qantas Airways Ltd to finance the purchase of two Boeing 747 series aircraft, the sixteenth and seventeenth in its fleet. The Qantas Airways Limited (Loan Guarantee) Bill 1976 enabled Qantas to negotiate loans in its own name, with the backing of a government guarantee, for the first time. It is proposed that this practice be continued. The airline will be required to consult with the Treasurer on the form of documentation for any loans negotiated and on the terms and conditions on which the monies are borrowed. Also, the airline will be required to satisfy the Treasurer that adequate and proper security is given to the Commonwealth over the two aircraft.
The proposed Government guarantee will be limited to an amount of $US80m, or its equivalent. This represents 80 per cent of the total cost of the two aircraft and associated equipment. Qantas requires these two additional aircraft to assist in the progressive replacement of the less economic B707 aircraft and to assist in meeting the increasing demand for international travel. I commend the Bill to the Senate.
Debate (on motion by Senator Georges) adjourned.
page 1294
Bill received from the House of Representatives.
Ordered that the Bill may be taken through all its stages without delay.
Bill (on motion by Senator Carrick) read a first time.
-I move:
I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.
Leave granted.
The speech read as follows-
Mr President, it is with great pleasure that I introduce the States Grants (Urban Public Transport) Bill 1978. The Bill, which honours our election policy commitment, will provide $300m to the States over the five years commencing 1 July 1978, by way of non-repayable grants to upgrade urban public transport.
As honourable senators will be aware, the current Urban Public Transport Agreement, under which the Commonwealth assists the States with urban transport capital works projects, comes to an end on 30 June 1978. Under that program, which has covered the five years since July 1973, we expect Commonwealth payments to total above $190m. As indicated, this legislation now before the Senate is to appropriate $300m. In other words we propose to increase our assistance for urban transport by more than 50 per cent as compared with the current program. I think this is a very clear demonstration of the concern of this Government to do all it can to improve public transport in Australia’s major urban centres. It is a particularly significant increase when viewed against the difficult budgetary situation.
Before turning to details of the legislation, there are a number of general comments which I should make. First of all, with regard to the general arrangements under which the program will operate, I should point out that these have been the subject of extensive discussions between my colleague, the Minister for Transport (Mr Nixon) and his State Government counterparts, as well as between officials. In fact, these discussions were first begun in early 1976 and it would be difficult to find more comprehensive and frank discussions.
The legislation before the Senate reflects the give and take of those consultations. Many of the arrangements provided for under the proposed legislation will in fact continue procedures which exist under the current legislation. However, a number of important changes have been made and new features introduced to meet States’ wishes.
One particularly important change which the States have repeatedly emphasised is the decision to commit the Commonwealth Government to a five-year funding program. Funds guaranteed in this way will greatly assist the States. It will enable them to enter into long-term contracts, secure in the knowledge of a guaranteed level of assistance from the Commonwealth. Under current arrangements the level of Commonwealth assistance was determined in the annual Budget context. To take one example, contracts for the supply of buses were guaranteed assistance from Commonwealth sources only in respect of work carried out on units delivered within the one year. Under the new arrangements, any State will be able to secure a guarantee of assistance for contracts covering a five-year program.
It is in recognition of the wishes of the States in this regard that we are proposing in the legislation to give each State a basic guaranteed allocation. Over the five years of the program this guaranteed amount will total $200m, allocated between States as follows:
New South Wales- $70m over the 5 years of the program
Victoria- $60m over the 5 years of the program
Queensland- $35m over the 5 years of the program
South Australia- $20m over the 5 years of the program
Western Australia- $ 10m over the 5 years of the program
Tasmania- $5m over the 5 years of the program
I should inform the Senate of the appreciation which the States expressed when Mr Nixon announced details of this new program at the recent meeting of the Australian Transport Advisory Council.
The remaining $100m of the Commonwealth ‘s contribution to this program has not at this stage been allocated between the States. This amount is available for allocation to the States at the rate of about $20m per annum. Each State’s share of this unallocated amount will be decided annually on the basis of needs and priorities assessed in the light of proposals put forward by the States. I must stress however that funds under this program- all of the funds to be appropriated by the Bill- can be made available only to support projects proposed by the States. It will not be an option for the Commonwealth to determine projects of its own accord. Such an approach will allow us to respond to changing needs and priorities throughout the five years of the program. It provides an essential element of flexibility for both the Commonwealth and the States. I should also comment that Commonwealth assistance will continue to be made available towards these State projects on a two/thirds one/third- basis. Therefore the total urban transport program under this Bill will amount to $450m.
I should also make another important point here. The new program departs from existing arrangements in that there is no automatic provision for the Commonwealth to support cost escalation as an additional contribution to each project. The provision in the 1973-78 program has proved difficult to administer, and places considerable demands on both the Commonwealth and each State. It introduced an element of open-endedness which created uncertainties. Consequently, under the 1978-83 program the extent of the Commonwealth’s liability to each project will be specifically determined at the time the project is approved.
Turning now to questions of administrative arrangements, the States will be required to submit proposals of projects to be assisted. All projects, including those which are to use a State’s guaranteed funds, will be subject to Commonwealth approval. This was, of course, the practice under the 1973-78 program. The requirement for approval of projects has been the subject of some comment. It is, as honourable senators will be aware, a feature common to many such assistance programs. One obvious example is the Roads Assistance Scheme. As with the roads legislation, this process of approving the use of Commonwealth funds in respect of particular projects is the best way of ensuring that this Parliament knows what use is being made of funds it has appropriated. There is no mystery in this - there is no unwarranted interference in State processes. Honourable senators will observe that the Bill provides for a process of consultation between the Commonwealth and the States after submission of proposals and before decisions are made on the projects the Commonwealth will support. As I stated earlier, the provisions of this Bill allow approval of a project to extend up to the full period of the program, that is, five years. States will, however, at the very least be required to submit proposals on an annual basis for a share of the annually allocated $20m.
It would be appropriate now to summarise briefly the main provisions of this legislation. I have, as the Senate will be aware, circulated an explanatory memorandum outlining the principles on which this legislation is based. I hope this additional material will prove helpful to senators. Turning now to details, clause 3 sets out the definition of terms used in this legislation. The coverage of this program has been extended to bring it into line with our roads and decentralisation programs. The six State capital cities, plus Newcastle, Wollongong and Geelong, will again be eligible. In the case of Sydney, the statistical division has been extended to include the Blue Mountains and Gosford- Wyong. We have also extended coverage of this scheme to urban areas with populations in excess of 40,000 and through the operation of clause 4 the Minister will, after appropriate consultation with the States, be able to include the urban areas of Ballarat, Bendigo, Toowoomba, Gold Coast, Townsville, Rockhampton, Cairns and Launceston as eligible under this program. Clause 4 will also allow the inclusion of areas to permit assistance to be provided for improvements in the three inter-urban corridors linking Newcastle, Wollongong and Geelong to Sydney and Melbourne respectively, as under the current scheme.
Clause 5 contains the project proposal, evaluation and consultation and approval arrangements which I have described previously. Clause 6 prescribes the two /thirds-one /third Commonwealth and State contributions. This clause also gives the States autonomy to implement approved projects. They will be restricted only by two financial ceilings: Firstly, by the amount of the maximum grant to the State for a year and, secondly, by the total approved cost of each project. Within those ceilings the State will have complete flexibility to adjust the rate at which projects are implemented. This will enable a
State to, say, accelerate expenditure on one or more projects in the light of circumstances, for example, unavoidable delays in other projects. Most importantly, it will no longer be a requirement for the States to seek Mr Nixon’s concurrence before awarding contracts or deciding how approved works are to be implemented.
Under clause 7 provision is made to enable any moneys not spent in a year to be transferred to subsequent years of the program. However, I must emphasise the States should not regard this provision as an easy way out if their expenditure performance does not meet the States’ expectation. The States must get on with the job. That has not always been the case. Under the existing Urban Public Transport Agreement, the States have had a history of not being able to live up to their expenditure expectations. For instance, in 1974-75 an amount of $67.01 m was budgeted on the basis of State’s forecasts, but only $45.03m was spent. In 1975-76, because States’ expenditure was so low the previous year, an amount of $40. 3m was made available in the Budget; but the States were only able to spend $33. 8m.
Last year, 1976-77, was the States’ best year; they were able to spend $58.4m but this was still short of the Budget figure of $64.6m. It is expected that this year’s allocation of $5 lm will be fully taken up.
Provision exists under clause 7 to transfer unspent funds from one State to one or more other States if circumstances warrant. Thus if a State fails to expend its additional allocations made under clause 8 those unexpended funds could be reallocated to another State or States if they have demonstrated needs. I should emphasise that the States ‘ guaranteed allocations as set out in the Schedule to the Bill cannot be transferred to another State.
The remaining clauses cover the normal financial and administrative requirements relating to the provisions of advances, justification of expenditure and appropriation of funds for this program. Clause 1 1 provides for the States to meet normal requirements relating to inspection of works and documents and also provides for regular progress reports. As with the current arrangements clause 1 1 provides for the Commonwealth to be represented on an appropriate State body concerned with forward planning of urban transport improvements. This arrangement has provided an important forum for exchange of Commonwealth and State views and has worked to the benefit of both parties under the current arrangements.
The current Agreement has seen undoubted benefits flow to urban public transport. We have seen new rolling stock- trains, trams and busesadded to the fleets of public transport operators. Railway track extensions and additional tracks have been constructed to increase the capacity of systems. We have seen major work undertaken towards electrification of the Brisbane suburban rail system as well as work towards linking the southern and northern sections of the Brisbane suburban network by construction of the crossriver rail link. Overall the current program has had a significant effect. It is Mr Nixon’s intention to have prepared a comprehensive report on the impact of the current program which will be presented to the Parliament in due course. However, some of the projects commenced under the current program are not yet completed. We, therefore, see one of the first priorities of the new program as being the rapid completion of such projects.
Mr President the requirements for adequate urban public transport are beyond dispute. Road congestion, car parking and pollution problems reinforce the need for a transport system which provides alternative means of urban mobility. We must never neglect those members of our society who depend upon public transport services. This Bill represents a substantial advance in our methods of assisting the States in urban transport improvement both in terms of fund and administrative arrangements. I commend the Bill to the Senate.
Debate (on motion by Senator Georges) adjourned.
page 1296
Bill received from the House of Representatives.
Ordered that the Bill may be taken through all its stages without delay.
Bill (on motion by Senator Guilfoyle) read a first time.
– I move:
I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.
Leave granted.
The speech read as follows-
The Bill proposes several amendments to the Aboriginal Councils and Associations Act 1 976, which is an Act the Government introduced to give effect to its policy of assisting Aboriginal communities and groups to incorporate themselves for various purposes and in a manner more acceptable to them. The amendments seek to resolve issues of concern to State and Territory governments, to remedy certain deficiencies found in the existing Act, and to provide for certain procedural matters.
The Act has been the subject of exhaustive discussion between the Commonwealth Government and State and Territory governments through the Australian Aboriginal Affairs Council. The main issue which concerned State and Territory Ministers was that Aboriginal Councils established under the Act might intrude into State responsibilites for local government, existing or proposed. When the Act was first introduced it was intended to provide a suitable vehicle for the incorporation of Aboriginal communities, particularly the remote and traditionoriented communities who might find difficulty with western European legal concepts as embodied in State and Territory legislation. In opening to Aboriginal communities the possibility of carrying out, through Councils, certain municipal-type functions, the Act was not intended to lead to a separate local government system. For example, by-laws made by an Aboriginal Council will not, under the Act, apply to a person who is not an Aboriginal and, under the amendments being introduced, consultation will have to take place with State and Territory Ministers before an Aboriginal Council is established in an area in which municipal services already exist or are proposed.
The anxiety that the establishment of separate local Government bodies might be in the Government’s mind and that it might lead to what has variously been described as separate development, the creation of semi-autonomous Aboriginal entities, and/or an encroachment on State rights under the federal system has occasionally been expressed. Perhaps I can set this anxiety to rest by emphasising that the selfmanagement objectives of the Government do not involve separate laws for Aboriginals whereby they are able to cut themselves off from the federal or State institutions of Government which are part of our nation’s fabric. Where the establishment under this legislation of Aboriginal Councils with municipal type functions is contemplated, the Minister is already required to take into account any proposed extension of local government into the area. The amendments to sections 16 and 17 of the Act now proposed go further than this. They require account to be taken of both existing and proposed local government responsibilities in areas where Aboriginal Councils are to be established, and for the Minister to consult with State or Territory Ministers before he decides on the establishment of a Council. It is to be hoped that these provisions will satisfy the States as to the Commonwealth’s good faith and intentions.
It is not intended that any organisation of Aboriginals or Islanders should be compelled to incorporate under Commonwealth legislation unless it wishes to acquire land from the Commonwealth or with the use of Commonwealth funds. From the latter point of view the Act will merely serve to ensure that land which the Commonwealth makes available for Aboriginal communities is not disposable without the consent of the Minister and is retained in perpetuity for the benefit of future generations of Aboriginal Australians. There is no State or Territory legislation which will achieve this. Another, and less controversial, objection raised by the States was to the effect of section 78 of the Act on the security of State interests in land acquired by Aboriginal corporations from State governments and the need for States to retain ownership and control of such lands transferred to an Aboriginal Lands Trust and subsequently leased to an Aboriginal corporation. To meet the States’ objection, which was valid, section 78 (2) is being amended by the deletion of the words or a State’. A further amendment is proposed in section 78 dealing with the disposability of land which would prevent an Aboriginal corporation from disposing of an estate or interest in land without seeking an order from the Minister declaring such land disposable. The former National Aboriginal Consultative Committee drew my attention some time ago to the fact that there was no provision in the Act for appeals against discretionary decisions by the Registrar in respect of various administrative functions vested in the Registrar by the Act. I agreed that this was an omission in the original Act, and various amendments are now being introduced to provide for Ministerial intervention in, or review of, decisions taken by the Registrar under the Act, where such intervention or review is appropriate.
The remaining amendments in section 3, in section 27, and in sections 38 and 59 are procedural and do not involve any matters of substance. One matter I might mention is the amendment proposed in section 3 to enable an Aboriginal association which is already incorporated under State or Territory law, to incorporate under this Act. The amendment proposed in section 46 ( 1 ) will prevent dual incorporation, and provision will be made in the Regulations to be made under this Act for the State or Territory authority concerned to be duly notified when such an association is incorporated under the Act. Honourable members will be aware that although the original Act was assented to on 15 December 1976, its proclamation has been delayed pending the resolution of the various issues which were raised concerning difficulties which were likely to arise in the implementation of the Act in the form in which it was enacted. The amendments now proposed should overcome these difficulties and allow for the proclamation of the Act. I commend the Bill to honourable members for their support.
Debate (on motion by Senator Grimes) adjourned.
page 1298
Bill received from the House of Representatives.
Ordered that the Bill may be taken through all its stages without delay.
Bill ( on motion by Senator Guilfoyle) read a first time.
– I move:
I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.
Leave granted.
The speech read as follows-
The purpose of this amending Bill is to permit increased assistance to Tasmania in respect of the continued operation of the Mt Lyell mine at Queenstown.
Honourable senators will recall that Parliament legislated last year to allow payment to Tasmania of up to half the amount paid by the Tasmanian State Government to the Mount Lyell Mining and Railway Company Limited. The Government provided this assistance to Tasmania pending consideration of the Industries Assistance Commission’s interim report on copper. In case further assistance might be warranted pending the Commission’s final report, the legislation provides for assistance up to 30 June 1978.
The Commission’s interim report was considered late in 1977 and the Government announced on 8 November that it accepted the Commission’s recommendation to extend the period of assistance pending consideration of the Commission’s final report. The Government announced that its offer of extended assistance was based on previous arrangements between the Commonwealth and Tasmania, under which the Commonwealth had assisted Tasmania on a dollar for dollar basis.
The Tasmanian Government subsequently indicated that it was unwilling to continue those arrangements. In conformity with its announced intention that the mine should continue pending consideration of the Industries Assistance Commission’s report, the Commonwealth Government then announced it was willing to provide all the necessary assistance, apart from an amount equal to the State’s receipts from payroll tax on the mine’s employment. This Bill accordingly seeks removal of the provision which limits Commonwealth assistance to half of the amounts paid to the company by Tasmania.
The uncertainty of the future world copper price makes it difficult to estimate accurately the cost to the Commonwealth of the increased assistance to Tasmania. However, a recent estimate is that the total cost of Commonwealth assistance for the period from November 1977 to June 1978 would be between $3m and $4m.
Following the termination on 8 November 1977 of the first Commonwealth-Tasmania agreement, and pending the introduction of this legislation, Tasmania has been paying to Mount Lyell the whole of the assistance necessary for the mine’s continued operation. However, Tasmania has done this in the expectation that the bulk of this assistance would be reimbursed by the Commonwealth. This legislation authorises reimbursement on the more generous basis we now envisage, and should ensure that Tasmania continues to provide assistance to the Mount Lyell operations at Queenstown on the agreed basis. I commend the Bill to honourable senators.
Debate (on motion by Senator Grimes) adjourned.
page 1298
– by leave- For the information of honourable senators, I lay on the table a report by the Department of Transport on Air Services in the Northern Territory and wish to make a statement relating to the Cavill Affair- Airline Services in Central Australia. I move:
I seek leave to have incorporated in Hansard the statement made today by the Minister for Transport (Mr Nixon).
Leave granted.
The document read as follows-
I am compelled to make this statement to the House because of charges laid by Mr R. R. Cavill, Managing Director of SAATAS, (South Australian and Territorial Air Services) and the member for Shortland, (Mr Peter Morris, M.P.). I am making a statement so that the Parliament itself can consider the charges and impose its own judgment on those involved.
The charges question the integrity not only of myself as Minister for Transport, but of officers of my Department, of the former Ministers responsible ibr Civil Aviation in previous Governments, of the Directors of Connair, of the owners and operators of several charters air services in Central Australia, of certain members of the National Party in the Northern Territory and of the Government.
I want to say at the start: The charges are totally false and malicious and clearly demonstrably so. That the Labor Opposition, through the member for Shortland, has become actively involved in what I will call the Cavill Affair is regrettable.
This matter was first raised on 13 April by the member for Shortland in this House, during the debate on the Airline Equipment Loan Guarantee Bills. He made certain charges concerning air service operations in the Northern Territory. He quoted from a statement by Mr Cavill of SAATAS not then available in Canberra, which had been given to him prematurely by Mr Cavill. I have not received nor seen a copy of Mr Cavill ‘s purported press statement of 13 April. I understand, however, that it is similar to a telex sent to me on 3 1 March.
Mr Cavill repeated his charges on at least two occasions- on A.M. and This Day Tonight on 14 April. The member for Shortland supported Mr Cavill with a statement on 20 April and an interview on A.M. on 2 1 April.
To the best of my belief, the charges by Mr Cavill and the member for Shortland are contained in the Hansard of 13 April, their press statement of 20 April, interviews with This Day Tonight on 14 April, and A.M. of the same date and A.M. on 2 1 April.
The major charge is that Connair, as the socalled opposition airline to SAATAS, has been given unfair Government assistance and that I and the National Country Party stand accused of pork-barrel politics and discrimination. The charge is quite mischievous and clearly cannot be sustained on the facts.
For the information of honourable members, I table a report prepared by my Department following the charges made by Mr Cavill and the member for Shortland. I draw honourable member’s attention to the first part of my Department’s report headed ‘Types of Service’, which shows the sharp distinction between the two operators.
Quite clearly SAATAS is not, and has never been, an opposition airline to Connair. Connair is the airline providing scheduled services in the Northern Territory. There are only five airlines in Australia of this type, namely, Ansett, T.A.A., Qantas, East-West and Connair. SAATAS, on the other hand, is a charter operator in competition with other charter operators, of which there are more than 480 in Australia.
Mr Cavill has known since at least October 1972 the position of the Commonwealth, when the then Minister for Civil Aviation, Senator Cotton, wrote to Mr Cavill stating, and I quote:
The position of the Commonwealth in these matters is as follows:
It has restricted the issue of air service licences in the Territory in an effort to ensure orderly, economic and efficient development of the industry there;
Your company is one of the favoured few who have been fortunate to gain an operating licence for the Territory;
In granting this licence to you originally, it was made perfectly clear what the relationship between Connair and the Commonwealth was;
The Commonwealth’s contract with Connair is a perfectly normal subsidy contract of a type which has been entered into with subsidised operators for many years;
This contract enables the Commonwealth to carry out all necessary investigations into the company’s affairs and to control its operations so as to ensure that subsidy costs are kept to a minimum;
The fundamental role of Connair, and the basis of its original foundation and development, is the provision of regular air services to remote localities in circumstances where uneconomic services are unavoidable; nevertheless, the company should be encouraged to develop other operations likely to reduce its subsidy requirement;
There is no evidence to suggest that SAATAS, for example, could perform the task allotted to Connair at a significantly different order of cost to the Commonwealth;
The late Sir Donald Anderson, when DirectorGeneral of Civil Aviation, had written to Mr Cavill on 14 January 1972, and listed seven benefits his company had accrued as a result of
Commonwealth policy or action. I quote from that letter:
I find it somewhat puzzling to note your apparent belief that this Department, or the Government, has acted to the disadvantage of SAATAS. Let me recapitulate some of the benefits which have accrued to the company as a result of Commonwealth policy or action:
SAATAS has been permitted to commence and expand operations in the Northern Territory even though this might have resulted in some increase in the subsidy requirements of Connair;
In the interests of SAATAS (and other existing operators) additional licences for services in the Northern Territory have been refused or severely restricted;
The limitations on charter flights over airline routes in the Territory provided under ANR 197(2) have been administered liberally in the case of SAATAS;
SAATAS operations to Ayers Rock have been facilitated, and recently, at the request of the company, a higher fare was approved for this route;
The Department did all it could to promote the commencement of services to and within Indonesia by SAATAS;
It has been insisted that charter services by the subsidised operator, Connair Pty Ltd, which would be competitive with SAATAS services, should be quoted for at charter rates based on full costs plus profit allowance so that no unfair advantage would be gained by Connair as a result of the Commonwealth subsidy;
The Department has assisted SAATAS considerably in making available hangar accommodation at Darwin Airport.
That letter puts the matter into the correct perspective. Our policy has never deviated from that described in October 1972. Mr Cavill and his colleagues have always been aware of it.
Mr Cavill’s claim that Connair has been given unfair Government assistance is, therefore, ludicrous. The overall operations of the two companies are clearly not comparable nor are the services they provide.
My Department’s report sets out the history of the Government’s financial arrangements with Connair.
The report shows that since its inception in 1939, successive Commonwealth Governments have supported, with financial assistance, the operation of the only regular scheduled regional airline for Central Australia.
Attachment 1 to the report sets out the payments made to Connair since the new agreement was entered into in 1965. The table shows that subsidy was continued during the three years of the Labor Government even though that Government made a decision to phase out the subsidy.
To suggest that the National Party is in some way responsible for the agreement is ludicrous.
In the first place, until December 1975 when I became Minister for the Department of Transport, no member of my Party had held Ministerial responsibility for aviation matters since before the current agreement was negotiated in 1965.
In addition, as my Department’s report demonstrates, all decisions relating to payments of financial assistance to Connair have been made on the basis of decisions by the Government, that is the Cabinet. No individual Minister has been in a position to act without Cabinet’s direction and approval.
It should be clearly understood that the basis of the financial assistance to Connair was an agreement negotiated in 1965 and approved by the then Government.
I point out that the 1977 Interdepartmental Committee referred to in the Department’s report recommended the following, and I quote:
The Committee recommends that the basis of Connair Pty Ltd, be confirmed as that of a regional airline’.
The Committee further recommended, and I quote:
That the Government does not accept the option of doing nothing for Connair Pty Ltd, and thereby bringing about its immediate demise’.
As I have said, Connair is Central Australia’s regional airline. It is quite distinct and separate from charter operators such as SAATAS. The airline was the brainchild of those living at the time in Central Australia who saw a need for such a service.
Since its inception it has served the people in the Northern Territory and Central Australia well. It has been necessary for the Government to provide financial assistance to Connair to ensure that regular air transport services were provided for people requiring them in the remote areas of the region. But, as I have said, the details of that assistance have always been publicly available and approved by Governments, not individual Ministers.
The second charge is that I, as Minister, have consistently refused Mr Cavill the opportunity to meet me.
I was curious that Mr Cavill could take this view. All he had to do was ask. In fact, I held a meeting with Mr Cavill on 6 October 1977 and have had regular correspondence with him. In addition my records show Mr Cavill has not sought a meeting with me since 6 October.
All Mr Cavill has done is to say he is prepared to meet me if I formally call a meeting.
On 23 March this year, Mr Cavill sent me a telex saying the Directors of SAATAS were considering closing their Australian flying operations the following week. Mr Cavill did not seek a meeting. What he said was, and I quote:
The Directors are prepared to discuss the proposed close down and any other matters if you wish ‘.
On 30 March I sent a telex to Mr Cavill saying that his company must, of course, make its own commercial decisions but that if he felt a meeting could be of benefit I was happy to meet with him.
Mr Cavill sent a reply on 31 March 1978 which said, and I quote:
I remain happy to meet with you … I would however suggest that such a meeting would need to be called by you and a specific agenda be set by you . . . ‘
My reply to Mr Cavill on 1 3 April said that because SAATAS was responsible for their own commercial decisions it was not proper for me to call for a meeting or specify the agenda. I then repeated my earlier offer to meet with the Company if Mr Cavill saw advantage in such a meeting.
I have not heard since from Mr Cavill.
Clearly, I have never refused to meet with Mr Cavill. What I have done is to refuse to allow Mr Cavill to use my ministerial office to assist his commercial activities.
The third charge is that the Commonwealth, in granting air service licences to Chartair and Tillair, had acted in a discriminatory manner actionable in the High Court.
The Department’s report sets out the details followed in granting or extending air service licences to Chartair and Tillair late last year. I am not sure what Mr Cavill’s own legal advisers are telling him. What I am sure of, however, is that my Department’s actions have been quite correct and in accordance with Government policy and established procedures.
On 20 October 1977 I approved the issue or extension of charter licences to Rossair (trading as Chartair) to Mr John Tilley of Katherine, Mr Frank Ashton of Tennant Creek, the Port Keats Mission in the Northern Territory and the Balgo Hills Mission in Western Australia.
The decision to issue the licences was not an arbitrary one. It was made in consultation with the responsible Member in the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly and the licences were expressly recommended by the interdepartmental committee set up to examine air links in the area currently serviced by Connair.
Charter operators, by their very nature, cannot expect to be given a guaranteed monopoly by
Governments. As I have said, there are more than 480 operators like SAATAS in Australia. There was, therefore, nothing discriminatory in issuing the charter licences on 20 October 1 977.
The Department’s report deals at length with the granting of financial assistance to undertake Connair’s mail services out of Alice Springs and new services of a similar type out of Katherine and Tennant Creek. The report speaks for itself. SAATAS was given an equal opportunity with the other operators in the region to bid for two routes. In both instances their bid was higher and, therefore, more expensive for the Government than the successful bidders, Chartair and Tillair.
Again the Report speaks for itself. In Alice Springs, Chartair indicated they required $20,514 per annum from the Government to undertake the mail service whereas SAATAS said they would require $22,350 per annum. At Katherine, Tillair undertook to run the service for a payment of $20,280 whereas SAATAS said they would require $26, 1 80.
Clearly there was nothing discriminatory in awarding the services to the most economical and, therefore, efficient operators. After all taxpayers funds were involved.
Mr Cavill appears to be confused about the timing of the approval to the two operators to run these services. The Department’s report states the position quite clearly, however.
I repeat, Mr Cavill and his company were provided with an equal opportunity to bid for the services, and the Government ‘s duty is to do no more than this. The operators decision to commence the services without waiting for Government approval on the levels of subsidy required was theirs to make as charter operators - SAATAS could have done the same.
After being given an equal opportunity to bid for the mail routes and after being unsuccessful because their bid was too high, SAATAS complained to my Department. They believed the method of seeking offers was unconventional and could give rise to legal challenge. At that time my Department sought legal confirmation that their approach had been correct. Such confirmation was given by the Assistant Crown Solicitor.
Again I point out that the proposed arrangements were developed by my Department, the Postal Commission and the Department of Finance in consultation.
The decisions on maximum levels of financial assistance were recently finalised by the Minister for Finance and myself in consultation.
There was clearly no discrimination, nor could there have been under the procedures followed in the matter. All procedures followed by the Government, myself as Minister, my Department, Australia Post, the Department of Finance and its Minister, have been proper, responsible and totally fair.
The Department’s report shows clearly that all the charges by Mr Cavill and the member for Shortland are totally false.
There has been no discrimination against SAATAS or any other operator. There has been no pork-barrelling by the National Party or any other Party. No individual or single company has been given unfair advantage.
This brings me to the next point. What were Mr Cavill ‘s and the member for Shortland ‘s true intentions in this matter?
An examination of all the relevant papers has led me to only one clear conclusion- Mr Cavill has consistently sought a position of monopoly and unfair advantage over other operators in the Northern Territory.
The member for Shortland claims he has evidence proving the charges that he and Mr Cavill have made. Mr Cavill says that he has evidence with respect to malpractice by the Government and personally by the Country Party in the Northern Territory.
I have already invited the member for Shortland to publish such papers, but to no avail. If Mr Cavill would like to have the Member for Shortland table all the correspondence he has had with me and my Department in the last ten years or so I will accommodate him.
I would be surprised, however, if Mr Cavill would want to table his correspondence- correspondence aimed at securing for himself and his Company a privileged position in the Northern Territory.
As far back as February 1968, Mr Cavill wrote to the late Sir Donald Anderson and I quote from that letter:
What my company seeks is a fair distribution of work given by Government Departments.
Again, on 29 November 1976, the Managing Director of SAATAS, wrote to a senior officer of my Department stating and I quote:
In another letter of the same day to my Department’s South Australian/Northern Territory regional Director, the Managing Director of SAATAS stated, and I quote:
We demand, therefore, when Connair phases out, that we are permitted to run Alice Springs/Ayers Rock as a monopoly . . .
That letter of 29 November really gave SAATAS’ game away when it said, and I quote:
Now, then more than ever, we need the economies of scale and we really believe that the service we have given has earned us the right to become the scheduled operator for the Northern Territory.
It is clear from the documents available that Mr Cavill and SAATAS have run a deliberate campaign aimed at causing the demise of Connair and the imposition of SAATAS in its place as the scheduled airline in Central Australia.
To give the House an indication of the lengths to which Mr Cavill has gone in his campaign. In December 1971, Mr Cavill on bis own initiative provided the late Sir Donald Anderson with what he described as ‘an assessment I have made of the financial operations of Connair’, The assessment’ painted a picture of unrelieved gloom and showed Connair in a hopeless financial position.
Sir Donald dismissed Mr Cavill ‘s ‘assessment’ on 14 January 1972 in the following words- ‘interesting but inaccurate in a number of respects’. Sir Donald went on to say and I quote:
I see no particular point in continuing this exercise. If Connair is willing to make public its accounts, estimates such as you have made will be unnecessary. If the company does not wish to take this step, it would be improper for the Department to comment on your efforts, and discussion based on incorrect assumptions would be fruitless.’
That attempt to have a Commonwealth Department of State provide an opinion of a private company’s operations and financial structure to another company demonstrates a complete lack of business ethics by Mr Cavill.
A more sinister move occurred on 8 April 1 972 when Mr Cavill wrote to the Chairman of Connair asking if the company would be prepared to negotiate a sale. To assist SAATAS, Connair made available copies of the loan agreement and subsidy agreement to Mr Cavill.
Then, on 1 1 May 1972, Mr Cavill sent a document titled ‘Northern Territory Air Services: Proposals for Reconstruction’ to a senior officer of the Department of Civil Aviation. The document proposed the formation of a new company to run air services in the Northern Territory with SAATAS holding 5 1 per cent of the shares and the Commonwealth holding 49 per cent.
In the document Mr Cavill proposed that his company should absorb, and I quote: those elements of CONNAIR Pty Ltd and South Australian and Territorial Air Services Pty Ltd that were considered desirable . . .’
Mr Cavill ‘s document went on to state, and I quote:
Eventually CONNAIR Pty Ltd as it exists now could be liquidated thus avoiding continued tenure of embarrassing accoutrements’.
Because no takeover offer was ever received, the Connair Board formally rejected SAATAS’ takeover suggestion on 20 December 1972. The letter from Connair to Mr Cavill said in part, and I quote:
The Board . . . wishes to emphasise, once again, and finally, that our correspondence, and our release of information to you have been entirely in response to your declared intention to make a cash offer for all the shares in our company. This has not eventuated, and we regard the matter as closed. ‘
I do not wish to take up the time of the House in disclosing any further Mr Cavill ‘s activities in seeking the demise of CONNAIR and its replacement with his own company or with a company or organisation of his own choosing.
On 1 9 August last year Mr Cavill wrote to me saying his company, and I quote: could, with notice of a few days only, provide all those services needed in the Northern Territory, as mentionedmy previous correspondence with your Department -without subsidy and with efficiency’.
In the light of this claim by SAATAS, the capacity of the company to undertake the services should be examined.
Just 9 days before Mr Cavill wrote to me on 1 9 August, the Department of Construction had complained bitterly to SAATAS describing the service the company provided as most unsatisfactory. The Department’s complaints ranged from SAATAS being late for scheduled take-off times and the inability of the company to have a light single aircraft on site, to the fact that they had to pay the hiring cost of a 9-seater aircraft to carry just one person. Unfortunately, the internal operations of SAATAS do nothing for the company’s image.
From the brief outline I have given of the actions of Mr Cavill and his company during recent years, and its aviation performance, the House will see what Mr Cavill has been up to.
It now appears that Mr Cavill has made some unwise commercial decisions in the past and is trying to blame everyone but himself for those mistakes. I am not sure what the company’s financial position is and what mistakes have been made with its management. On 29 November 1976, however, the managing director of SAATAS, in a letter to a senior officer of my Department said, and I quote:
Today our ability to survive is being eroded in two ways. Firstly the Australian Government’s cost-cutting program has caused a serious decline in the demand for air charter in the Northern Territory. Secondly, our Indonesian operation has gone sour with our large foreign customers pulling out of the country. No longer can the profits from Indonesia prop up the struggling charter business in the Northern Territory. ‘
As I have said, SAATAS is a charter operator, one of more than 480 in Australia. It is a private operator and, therefore, free to make its own commercial decisions. Its mistakes are of its own making and its future of its own choosing.
The role of the member for Shortland in this unsavoury matter is curious and sad. On 8 December 1972, six days after the change of Government, Mr Cavill wrote to the then Director-General of Civil Aviation and said:
A change of Government sets the stage for essential civil aviation reforms particularly in that section involving my company. ‘
He effectively repeated that comment in a letter to me on 4 February 1 976 when he said:
I feel that a practical and positive solution to this problem can now be achieved particularly having regard to the changed political environment. ‘
That statement may come as a surprise to the member for Shortland and those of his colleagues who were under the impression Mr Cavill was one of theirs. His actions clearly show a devious duplicity. In 1972 Mr Cavill was meeting with the Member for Adelaide to press his case. During 1973 Mr Cavill was negotiating with the Labor Government using pressure from the Dunstan Government. In 1975 he was seeking me, in Opposition, to press his case again. I am quite sure that my predecessor, the honourable member for Newcastle (Mr Charles Jones), could have warned the honourable member for Shortland about Mr Cavill’s methods. I am pleased to say he did not get anywhere with the honourable member for Newcastle and I am pleased to be able to show the House he has not got anywhere with me and will not.
I regret that the member for Shortland has not shown the perception and understanding of his colleague, the former Minister. The member for Shortland, of course, has not had the sobering experience of ministerial office. Perhaps after his performance in this matter he never will. The charges brought by the member for Shortland at the instigation of Mr Cavill were indeed serious. They were given public airing on at least two national media programmes. It is never my wish to disclose damaging information or evidence against any member of the public or member of this House. However, if the media is used to bring charges which are totally false and mischievous- charges which if unrebutted are personally damaging to the integrity and character of those they have been brought against- the persons bringing them must be exposed.
It is my sincere wish that the member for Shortland has learnt his lesson. It is my sincere wish that on future occasions the member will make sure of his facts before making such outrageous statements and allowing himself to be used by devious operators for commercial reasons. I thank the House.
Debate (on motion by Senator Georges) adjourned.
Senate adjourned at 10.24 p.m.
page 1305
The following answers to questions were circulated:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 21 February 1978:
– The Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 21 February 1978:
Did the Prime Minister state at a dinner of American businessmen in the United States last year that Dillingham Mining Company was running out of orders at the time sand-mining on Fraser Island was suspended, and that the Company might have concluded its Fraser Island operations even if the decision to ban mining on Fraser Island had not been taken, as reported in the Brisbane Sunday Mail on 26 June 1977; if so, what evidence can the Prime Minister provide to support his claims.
– The Prime Minister has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
The dinner to which the honourable senator refers was a private function.
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 22 February 1 978:
– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 23 February 1978:
Will the Government fulfil its promise to Aboriginals on land rights and bring in legislation to acquire Queensland Aboriginal settlements, in order to overcome the decision of the Privy Council in the case of the Aurukun mining rights, and to enable Aboriginal residents to have a say in the control of Aboriginal settlements.
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following reply to the honourable senator’s question:
The 1975 policy statement of the coalition parties indicated that the parties recognise “the rights of Aborigines to the lands located within the reserves in the Northern Territory” and included a commitment “to make lands available, either by grant or through the provision of funds, to tribal Aboriginals living on or near their traditional areas which are not on reserves and to detribalised Aboriginals in rural or urban areas”. These commitments are being fulfilled.
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (Queensland Reserves and Communities Self Management) Act 1978 provides that Aboriginal and Islander communities on reserves may manage their own affairs.
In relation ot the proposed Aurukun mining development, the Commonwealth Government’s position remains as stated by the Prime Minister in 1976: the Government is concerned to see that there is adequate and appropriate consultation with the people at Aurukun and that the development conforms with the Government’s foreign investment policy.
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 23 February 1978:
What submissions have been received by officers administering the Homeless Persons Program for the financial year 1977-78.
– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:
Submissions received for assistance under the homeless persons program in 1977-78 are as follows:
These submissions are in addition to projects valued at $8.7m which have already been approved under the program. Given that the Homeless Persons Assistance Act is to be reviewed in the context of the 1978 Budget, the submissions referred to above will be assessed in the light of funds available for the program.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 23 February 1978:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following reply to the honourable senator’s question:
1 ) (a) No specific provision is made for the Aboriginal Legal Service in Townsville. The executive of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Service determines the apportionment of its annual allocation to each of its offices, including Townsville. Expenditure by the Townsville office in 1976-77 totalled $95,963.
All funds provided in my Department’s 1976-77 program for these organisations were released during the financial year.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 23 February 1978:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following reply to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 22 February 1978:
– The Minister for Health has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
Imports from ASEAN Countries (Question No. 91)
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Industry and Commerce, upon notice, on 28 February 1 978:
– The Minister for Industry and Commerce has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s questions: (1 ), (2), (3) and (6) Comprehensive statistics and import quota details have been compiled from information which is generally available from such sources as the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the Bureau of Customs and the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations. As it would not be practicable to include all this data in an answer of this type I have arranged for the details to be forwarded to Senator Wriedt separately.
In the context of the questions asked it should be noted, however, that tariff quota and import licensing arrangements currently applying are essentially of a global character.
Under the present system, manufacturing enterprises seeking reviews of assistance against imports first approach the Department of Industry and Commerce. The Department normally publicly notifies other interested parties that it has been approached for a review of protection and invites general comments. If after this information has been compiled, it appears that a prima facie case has been established, warranting a review of the assistance being accorded the industry concerned, a reference is sent to either the Temporary Assistance Authority where emergency protection is sought or to the Industries Assistance Commission whichever is appropriate. Specific details submitted in the course of these investigations relating to individual company’s operations and employment are naturally treated in confidence. However, detailed employment statistics relating to the industries are included in the information mentioned above as being forwarded separately.
The Senator would be aware that these industries have been subject to a number of reports by the Industries Assistance Commission in recent years. These reports are available in the Parliamentary Library.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 28 February 1 978:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following reply to the honourable senator’s question: (1), (2) and (3) My Department has not, within the last three years, engaged the Institute of Cultural Affairs as a consultant nor has it in any other way been associated with the Institute as a client.
My Department has however, provided financial assistance to the Oombulgurri Aboriginal Community near Wyndham and this community has, in turn, employed the Institute of Cultural Affairs in a community development capacity.
Steps have recently been taken to reduce the number of ICA staff employed at Oombulgurri to allow the Oombulgurri people to become an independent, self-determining community.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 23 February 1978:
– The Minister for Health has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
These recommendations included the establishment of an examining body, possibly to be known as the Australian Medical Examining Council (AMEC), which would hold examinations in Australia to be sat by overseas medical practitioners whose qualifications are not automatically registrable in Australia.
The Medical Boards have been invited to nominate members to this body, but as yet not all have done so. It is expected, nevertheless, that the procedures necessary to form the new examining body will soon be finalised so that the first sessions of examinations can be held in September 1978.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice:
– The Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s questions:
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 28 February 1978:
– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:
asked the Minister for Administrative Services, upon notice, on 1 March 1978:
– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:
The information sought by the honourable senator, which can be provided by the Australian Electoral Office, is set out in the following table. I will write to the honourable senator with the additional information which he sought when it becomes available from the Australian Statistician.
Broadcasting (Question No. 138)
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, on notice, on 28 February 1 978:
– The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 2 March 1978:
– The Minister for National Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
Power Alcohol from Sugar (Question No. 168)
asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Development, upon notice, on 14 March 1978:
– The Minister for National Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
and (2) I understand Mr Anthony made reference to the possibility of using sugar as a base for the manufacture of power alcohol for mixing with petrol to make our oil reserves last longer. However, I doubt that he saw this as an immediate possibility.
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 2 March 1978:
– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:
Recent Developments in New Zealand Education;
Items Arising from OECD Review of Australian Educational Policy;
Community Schools and Colleges;
Decentralisation of Decision Making; 2 February- Seminars for Ministers and Advisers on the Education of Minority and Migrant Groups held in a Maori Community.
Delegates and staff from the Commonwealth who attended the AEC meeting on 27 January and some or all of the other meetings were:
Senator the Hon. J. L. Carrick, Minister for Education; The Hon. Ian Viner, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs; Mr Jim Robertson, Ministerial Member, Northern Territory Legislative Assembly.
Mr K. N. Jones, Secretary, Department of Education; Professor P. H. Karmel, Chairman, Tertiary Education Commission.
Dr K. R. McKinnon, Chairman, Schools Commission; Mr C. Perkins, First Assistant Secretary, Department of Aboriginal Affairs.
Mr R. McHenry, Senior Private Secretary to Mr Viner; Miss H. Hughan, Personal Secretary to Senator Carrick.
Mr Viner and his advisers had discussions also with the Minister and Department of Maori Affairs.
Mr B. Milligan, Assistant Secretary, Education Planning Group, Department of Education, participated also in the meetings from 3 1 January to 2 February.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 8 March 1978:
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 9 March 1978:
– The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
In this regard, I invite your attention to the following extract from the Prime Minister’s statement made to the House of Representatives on 7 March 1978 (Hansard H of R No. 3, 7-9 March 1978, page 462).
I am informed that officials cannot recall a previous occasion where an officer whilst being significantly involved in a current tender case has left to join one of the tenderers’.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Northern Territory, upon notice, on 8 March 1978:
– The Minister for the Northern Territory has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
For the 1 977-78 financial year funds provided by the Federal Government are provided through the Commonwealth Public Account and access to the Public Account by the Northern Territory Executive is by way of warrant authority issued by the Government. There is no payment of cash or cheque.
Section 5 of the Allocation of Funds (Appropriation) Ordinances No. 1 and 2 1977-78 provided that the Executive Member for Finance and Planning may issue an order applying funds provided by the Federal Treasurer in aid of the Northern Territory Public Service Departments or the services in respect of which no or insufficient funds have been allocated. Because of a re-arrangement of the Commonwealth ‘s administrative orders the function for the provision of funds and control of government appropriations has transferred from the Treasurer to the Minister for Finance. As the Ordinance now stands the Executive Member for Finance and Planning cannot accept funds from the Minister for Finance.
During the current session of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly Bill to amend the Interpretation Ordinance was introduced (Serial No. 42). Following passage of this Bill and assent by the Administrator an application may be made to the Administrator to gazette an order substituting Minister for Finance in the Allocation of Funds (Appropriation) Ordinances for Treasurer. This will remove the legal difficulty preventing passage of funds to the Northern Territory Executive. The Government has undertaken to provide an additional funding of $1,396,535 to meet the expenditures arising from the transfers of 1 January 1978.
In the meantime, an order has been issued in accordance with Section 5 of the abovementioned Ordinances transferring funds from within the existing appropriations to provide for the services and functions transferred on 1 January 1 978.
A copy of this order has been tabled in the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly. It will be necessary to revoke this order at a later stage following the receipt of the necessary warrant authority from the Minister for Finance.
asked the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 8 March 1978:
Did Mr Berkeley give any reasons for his resignation from the Curriculum Development Centre (Senate Hansard, 7 March 1978, page 362); if so, what reasons did Mr Berkeley give.
– The answer to the honorable senator’s question is as follows:
As required under Section 14 of the Curriculum Development Centre Act 1975 Mr Berkeley formally tendered his resignation in writing to the Governor-General. He did not state any reasons for his resignation.
asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 14 March 1978:
How many ‘severely disabled’ persons are there in Australia who are: (a) physically handicapped; (b) visually handicapped; and (c) intellectually handicapped, in view of the Minister’s speech at Manila, in January 1978, concerning legislation for the handicapped in Australia, and the Minister’s reference to services for ‘Severely disabled persons of working age’.
– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:
Statistical information relating to the categories of handicapped people nominated in the question is not readily available. The Australian Bureau of Statistics conducted a survey in 1974 of ‘Chronic Illnesses, Injuries and Impairments’ which identified 3.7 million persons or, 28 per cent of the civilian population covered by the survey, as suffering from one or more chronic illnesses, injuries or impairments. Of this group almost 1 . 2 million or 32 per cent reported that the con ditions) limited their activities in some way.
Each chronic condition reported in the survey was classified according to the most appropriate category of the 1 965 revision of the International Classification of Diseases. However, because a number of individuals reported more than one chronic illness this information does not reveal the number of persons in each category of disability, but rather the total number of chronic illnesses reported. Where a person had more than four chronic illnesses only the four most serious were recorded.
A further indication of ‘severe disablement’ in the community, is available through certain statistics maintained by my Department, particularly those in relation to its pensioners and beneficiaries, and recipients of various allowances. For example, as at December 1977 there were 197,025 persons in receipt of an invalid pension (being persons who are at least 85 per cent incapacitated for work). Further statistical information is available from the annual report and other departmental publications. The same sources would also provide information relating to Commonwealth rehabilitees. In this latter respect, for example, the Commonwealth Rehabilitation Service (CRS) was able to assist some 3,000 severely handicapped persons of working age last year including approximately 1 , 600 who were able to return to various forms of gainful employment following rehabilitation.
It should also be noted that recent Departmental surveys of sheltered workshops and activity therapy centres obtained information on the major disabilities of persons attending these facilities. Copies of reports on these surveys are available from my Department and I have arranged for the honourable senator to be provided with a copy of each report.
The honourable senator will recall that lengthy question (No. 1 5 ) relating to disability was included in the 1976 Census. I understand it is expected that data in respect of this question will become available later this year. This will provide some further information concerning the numbers of disabled people in Australia and their needs. However, the question is of a broad nature and detailed follow-up surveys would be necessary to produce sufficiently accurate analyses for specific planning purposes.
asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 15 March 1978:
– The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 14 March 1978:
Why is the Australian Broadcasting Commission not represented on the Australian Government Task Force or a National Communications Satellite System.
– The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following answers to the honourable senator’s question:
The Task Force is composed of a number of Departments and Statutory Authorities representing a wide variety of experience and interests. Serious consideration was given to inclusion of the Australian Broadcasting Commission, but the membership was already large and it was concluded that all television and radio interests could best be represented by the Postal and Telecommunications Department. As required by the terms of reference, the Task Force has already conferred with, and is to confer further with the ABC.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 14 March 1978:
Have changes in staffing standards in nursing homes been made since the introduction of deficit financing under the provisions of the Nursing Homes Assistance Act 1 974.
– The Minister for Health has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
As advised in my reply to Question No. 257 (Hansard, 6 April 1978 (page 970)) the staff hours accepted as the base level for a nursing home for the purposes of deficit financing under the provisions of the Nursing Homes Assistance Act are those staff hours which were in operation during the October-December 1974 period, subject to certain adjustments as outlined in my reply.
If the honourable senator is referring to minimum staffing hours, the only significant variation has occurred in New South Wales. On 1 July 1976 the New South Wales Health Commission introduced the minimum staffing requirements recommended by the Hospital and Allied Services Advisory Council Working Party on Guidelines for Private Nursing Homes.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 4 April 1 978:
– The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 4 April 1 978:
– The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on the 5 April 1978:
– The Foreign Minister has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 5 April 1978:
– The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transpsort, upon notice, on 4 April 1978:
What are the details of oil tanker mishaps which have occurred since the Minister provided an answer to Question No. 1 14 (Senate Hansard, 31 March, 1977, page 777).
– The Minister for Transport has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice:
– The Minister for Primary Industry has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s questions:
I have been informed by the Australian Wool Corporation as follows:
1 ) Total advertising expenditure on press and radio advertising including where appropriate, agency and design fees, at 12 April 1978, is $3,530. Expenditure incurred but not yet paid is approximately $8,000. Other forms of promotional expenditure including explanatory film, talks at grower meetings total approximately $9,700.
Estimated future advertising expenditure for press and radio covering both Victoria and Western Australia is approximately $ 1 , 000.
All funds required to finance LOPS, including its advertising, have been borrowed from commercial sources at commercial rates of interest.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice:
What action, if any, does the Minister propose to take following the statement released by the Ancient Order of Foresters Friendly Society in Queensland that it is in ‘serious financial difficulties ‘.
– The Minister for Health has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
When it became known that the Ancient Order of Foresters Friendly Society in Queensland was in financial difficulties and was about to cease operations (including its medical and hospital insurance operations) action was taken under Section 75 of the National Health Act to secure all relevant documents relating to the organisation’s registered medical and hospital funds. These records are now in the custody of my Department. Further, under Section 82R of the National Health Act, I have requested the organisation to show cause why I should not appoint an Inspector under the terms of the National Health Act. The AOF have 14 days to respond to this order.
The honourable senator may be interested to know that on 7 April 1978 the Supreme Court of Queensland appointed an Ad ministrator to carry on the examination of the Society ‘s affairs including ascertaining its total liabilities.
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 4 April 1978:
– The Minister for Health has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
Since that time, the necessary negotiations with State authorities have been completed in all States except Queensland and I have approved Community Health Program funding for 40 additional refuges as well as for the expansion of two refuges previously approved. The Commonwealth Government had every intention of allocating a proportion of the $lm to Queensland to fund additional women’s refuges in 1977-78. To that end, it initiated negotiations with Queensland and other State authorities on 1 8 August 1977- only two days after the 1977-78 Commonwealth Budget was announced. Those negotiations are still continuing in the case of Queensland, and it is hoped that they will be completed before the end of this financial year, so that additional refuges in that State can be funded. Until these negotiations have been completed, I will not be in a position to consider specific recommendations for the funding of additional refuges in Queensland. It follows that I am not yet able to provide details concerning the total amount of funding involved, which women’s refuges are to receive funding or how much each will receive.
Sandmining on Fraser Island (Question No. 312)
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 4 April 1978:
– The Minister for Trade and Resources has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
Sandmining on Fraser Island (Question No. 313)
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 4 April 1978:
– The Minister for Trade and Resources has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
Sandmining on Fraser Island (Question No. 316)
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 4 April 1978:
– The Minister for Trade and Resources has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 10 April 1 978:
– The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
There are five stages in the selection of topics for the 1981 Census.
The first stage, that of inviting submissions for the inclusion or exclusion of topics for the Census, is already completed. The response has been good with 858 submissions for topic inclusions (673 of them from government bodies and 185 from private individuals and organisations) and 45 submissions for topic exclusions (18 of them from governmental bodies and 27 from private individuals and organisations).
The second stage, the evaluation of the submissions, involves an examination by officers of the Australian Bureau of Statistics of issues raised in the submissions. Before the Statistician can finalise a report on the feasibility of including topics and the effects on users of statistics of including or excluding topics, considerable testing and evaluation of questions will have to be undertaken.
The third stage will be a report to the Government by the Statistician, expected to be received in mid- 1979.
The fourth stage of consideration of the matter by the Government will then commence. I cannot be specific at this date on the procedures that will be followed, but I would expect there to be full consultation with the Parliament.
The fifth stage involves the passage of legislation, including the specifying of topics to be included in the Census forms. That will have to be completed during the first half of 1980, in order to leave time for finalising the Census forms for printing, which is expected to take about 12 months.
asked the Minister for Science, upon notice, on 7 April 1978:
– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:
The Government recognises the potential value to Australia of MHD power generation and is maintaining a watching brief on world developments, as recommended in the 1977 report of the National Energy Advisory Committee.
asked the Minister for Science, upon notice, on 10 April 1 978:
– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows:
Community Adviser at Delissaville (Question No. 381)
asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 12 April 1978:
Why was the community adviser at Delissaville, Northern Territory, transferred when the Relyuen Community Council and the other organisations opposed it.
– The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following reply to the honourable senator’s question:
My Department has not proceeded with the proposal to transfer the Community Adviser at Delissaville elsewhere.
Crude Oil Prices
asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Development the following question, without notice, on 22 February 1978:
Has the Government’s formula for bringing the prices for Australian crude oil to the level of import parity prices resulted in the Esso-BHP organisation receiving for its crude oil $3.40 a barrel instead of $3.20 a barrel, as is indicated in the Budget Papers? Does that constitute a financial windfall to Esso-BHP of some $14.8m in excess of the $109m increase in profit it would make over and above the normal operating profit as a result of the phasing in of the import parity prices policy? If so, is that appropriate at a time when motorists are paying higher prices for petrol, small business is struggling to survive and the worker is continually being asked to tighten his belt?
– The Minister for National Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
The $3.20 per barrel quoted in the Budget context was, and could only be, an indicative estimate based on an assumed production schedule for crude oil from the various fields in Bass Strait. The average price actually received for the period to 3 1 December 1977 was $3.28 per barrel. These prices relate only to crude oil and do not include condensate, for which the producers have been receiving import parity (less the levy).
The average price received by the producers for crude oil in the first half of 1978 is expected to be higher as a result of production from the Mackerel field which came on stream last December.
Motor Vehicles: Use of Liquefied Petroleum Gas
asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Development without notice, on 1 March 1978:
Has the Government given any consideration to removing sales tax on the conversion equipment that is required for vehicles so that they can run on liquefied petroleum gas and also to the removal of the small excise of LPG used in motor vehicles? If not, will the Government give serious consideration to these suggestions as a means of conserving a scarce energy source which also will bring about a reduction in the pollution that is caused by traffic in cities?
– The Minister for National Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
See speech I made in debate on 14 March 1978 (Hansard, page 678).
Computer Tender
-On 2, 8 and 9 March (Hansard, pages 268, 417-418 and 487) Senator Wriedt asked me questions without notice relating to the tenders for the Australian Bureau of Statistics and Department of Trade and Resources. The Prime Minister has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
I see no need to add to the information already provided - on this matter in my statement of 7 March 1978 (Hansard, pages 438-62) and on subsequent occasions.
Computer Tender
-On 8 March 1978 (Hansard, page 419) Senator Bishop asked me, as Minister representing the Prime Minister, a question, without notice, concerning the computer tender for the Australian Bureau of Statistics and Department of Trade and Resources. The Prime Minister has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
I see no need to add to what I said on this matter in my statement of 7 March 1978 (Hansard, pages 458-62) and on subsequent occasions.
Energy Research
asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Development, without notice, on 5 April 1978:
I direct the Minister’s attention to the report of the Australian Science and Technology Council entitled ‘Energy Research and Development in Australia’, which was tabled in the Senate yesterday. Two of the recommendations state:
An organisational structure is necessary and should be established without delay to expand activity in energy research, development and demonstration.
An Australian Energy Research, Development and Demonstration Authority (AERDDA) should be appointed as quickly as possible, with terms of reference as outlined.
I also refer the Minister to the main recommendation of the Senate Standing Committee on National Resources in its report on solar energy. The Committee recommended that: . . the Commonwealth Government establish a statutory body to be called the Australian Energy Commission to have an overall responsibility for developing and co-ordinating long term Australian energy policy.
Will the Minister indicate whether the Government has any plans to act on these recommendations?
– The Minister for National Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
The establishment of a high level body, closely linked to the National Energy Advisory Committee, to advise on the special measures needed to administer an expanded program for energy research and development is stated Government policy.
This matter is under active consideration by the Government and I hope to be able to announce in the near future the name of the body, its membership and terms of reference.
Dartmouth Dam
asked the Minister representing the Minister for National Development the following question, without notice, on 6 April 1978:
Is the SEC of Victoria also obliged to meet full cost of any necessary work which may have to be carried out below the Dartmouth Dam on the Mitta Mitta River to control surge effects when the hydro-electricity plant is operating or will this cost be shared by all governments which are members of the River Murray Commission.
– The Minister for National Development has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:
As I indicated in my letter of 20 March, the State Electricity Commission of Victoria has agreed to meet all the costs associated with the construction and operation of hydro-electric power installations at Dartmouth Dam. These works include the construction of a re-regulating dam on the Mitta Mitta River downstream of Dartmouth Dam to smooth out fluctuations in river flow resulting from power station releases. In addition, the Victorian Government has undertaken to be responsible for any river bank erosion directly attributable to the power station operations.
Unemployment: University Graduates
– On 2 March 1978 Senator Tehan asked me a question without notice relating to graduate unemployment. In particular, he asked:
In my reply I indicated that statistics were maintained and that I would provide the Senate with the most up-to-date figures. The Tertiary Education Commission has now provided me with the following information in response to the honourable senator’s question:
Statistics on the number of university graduates who are unable to obtain employment are published in the Graduate Careers Council Publication ‘First Destinations of 1976 University and College Graduates’.
Tables 1 and 2 set out the results from the most recent annual survey conducted by the Graduate Careers Council of Australia in respect of university and college graduates seeking, but unable to obtain, full-time employment in the first year following graduation. The tables show the percentages of 1 976 first degree university, and first degree/diploma college graduates, who at 30 April 1977 were still seeking full-time employment, broken down by major subject studied. The survey is based on all university graduates and 40 per cent of college graduates who qualified for awards in 1976. The results are based on a response rate of 79 per cent of university graduates and 58. 5 per cent of the sampled college graduates.
It should be noted that employment prospects for graduates still remain better than for the population as a whole. Although routine unemployment statistics do not distinguish persons with particular levels of qualifications, a survey carried out by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in May 1977 estimated that approximately 6,500 graduates were seeking work at that time. The Commission estimates that there were approximately 250,000 persons with university or college degrees in the labour force in 1977. The number of unemployed graduates was thus approximately 2.6 per cent of the total number with graduate qualifications. The level of unemployment for the labour force generally in May 1977 was 5.1 per cent while unemployment among persons aged 20 years and over was about 3.6 per cent. Unemployment among degree holders is thus about three-quarters of the rate for the adult population generally. Unemployment among school leavers in May 1977 was estimated to be 16.3 per cent.
There are two points to make about these estimates. First, the figure for unemployed graduates is an estimate of the number of persons looking for work; it includes some who even though they would have no difficulty finding a job, remain unemployed in the hope of finding a job more suited to their qualifications and interests. This tendency is more likely to occur among unemployed graduates than the unemployed population generally. Secondly, because most new graduates, like school leavers, go into the labour market in the early part of the year, there are seasonal influences. A survey taken towards the end of the year would certainly show a lower level of unemployment among graduates. Taken together, these figures suggest that the estimates overstate the number of graduates unable to find any employment within a reasonable period following graduation.
Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 2 May 1978, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1978/19780502_senate_31_s77/>.