Senate
15 April 1980

31st Parliament · 1st Session

  1. Senate
  2. 31st Parliament
  3. 1980

The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sir Condor Laucke) took the chair at 3 p.m., and read prayers.

page 1425

MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS

Senator CARRICK:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · New South WalesLeader of the Government in the Senate · LP

– I inform the Senate that the Prime Minister (Mr Malcolm Fraser) left Australia today to attend the independence celebrations in Zimbabwe. The Minister for Trade and Resources (Mr Anthony) will act as Prime Minister until Mr Fraser ‘s return.

page 1425

ABORIGINAL LAND RIGHTS (NORTHERN TERRITORY) AMENDMENT BILL 1980

Senator CHANEY:
Minister for Aboriginal Affairs · Western AustraliaMinister for Aboriginal Affairs · LP

– by leave- On 2 April I introduced the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment Bill 1980 into the Senate. In that part of the second reading speech relating to roads on Aboriginal land I said:

The amendments proposed by this Bill seek to give effect to an agreed solution formulated by the Aboriginal land councils, the Northern Territory Government and the Commonwealth -

Yesterday I received a telegram from Mr Wesley Lanhupuy, the manager of the Northern Land Council, advising that the Northern Land Council had rejected this compromise on two occasions and again in February 1 980. 1 simply alert the Senate to the fact that in the light of that telegram the statement I made may be inaccurate. I will make a fuller statement to the Senate prior to proceeding with the Bill.

page 1425

PETITIONS

Moscow Olympic Games

Senator CHIPP:
VICTORIA

– I present the following petition from 8 citizens of Australia:

To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled.

The Petition of the undersigned respectfully showeth:

That we the undersigned oppose the proposed boycott of the 1980 Olympic Games in Moscow, and we therefore pray that the Government take no action to prevent Australian athletes from competing.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray.

Petition received and read.

Social Security Benefits

Senator MELZER:
VICTORIA

– I present the following petition from 1 9 citizens of Australia:

To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

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

Your petitioners therefore pray:

1 ) That the Government adopt positive policies to reduce unemployment.

That the basic Unemployment Benefit be raised to at least the level of the poverty line as calculated by Professor Henderson.

In line with other Social Service additional income awards, and in order to encourage work creation schemes and the fostering of initiative and self respect, that the S6.00 per week additional income limit be raised to at least $20.00 per week.

That the financial penalties above the earning of $20.00 per week, assessed on a monthly basis, be calculated at the same rate as other Social Security benefits.

That the Commonwealth grant subsidies to State governments so that the unemployed can be granted transport concessions in order that they are not penalised in job seeking.

That pharmaceutical and medical concessions be granted to the unemployed equivalent to those received by other Social Service beneficiaries.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray.

Petition received and read.

The Acting Clerk- Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows:

Social Security Benefits

To the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled the petition of the undersigned citizens respectfully showeth:

That there is an urgent need to ensure that the living standard of pensioners will not decline, as indeed, the present level of cash benefits in real terms requires upward adjustment beyond indexation related to the movement of the Consumer Price Index, by this and other means your petitioners urge that action be taken to:

  1. Adjust all pensions and benefits quarterly to the Consumer price Index, including the ‘ fixed ‘ 70 ‘s rate.
  2. Raise all pensions and benefits to at least 30 per cent of the Average Weekly Earnings.

  3. Taxation relief for pensioners and others on low incomes by:

    1. The present static threshold of $75 per week for taxation purposes be increased to $ 100 per week.
    2. A substantial reduction in indirect taxation on consumer goods.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Senators Dame Margaret Guilfoyle and Primmer.

Petitions received.

Life Insurance and Superannuation Contributions: Tax Deductibility

To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled.

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

That the proportion of pensionable people within our community is increasing at a significant rate. The number of people over 65 years old will rise from approximately 8.5% of the population as it was in 1970 to over 10% by 1990 and about 1 6% by the year 2020.

That technological change is accelerating the trend towards earlier retirement from the workforce.

That the above factors make incentives for self-provision in retirement years a matter of great urgency if future generations of Australians are to be spared the crippling taxation which would be necessary to fund such provisions from social welfare.

That Australia is in urgent need of locally raised investment capital for national development and that life insurance and superannuation funds are important mobilisers of such capital.

Your petitioners therefore most humbly pray that the Government will forthwith take the steps necessary to:

  1. Remove contributions paid by the taxpayer to superannuation funds from the rebate system and make them a separate deduction from assessable income.
  2. Allow as such deduction amounts necessary to provide the individual with a reasonable retirement benefit as defined from time to time by the Commissioner of Taxation.
  3. Remove Life insurance premiums paid from the rebate system and make them a separate deduction from assessable income also.
  4. Allow such a deduction to lake the form of a flat rebate of 20 percent of Life Insurance premiums up to a limit of $2500.

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray, by Senator Chaney.

Petition received.

National Women’s Advisory Council

To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled:

The Petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

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

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

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

Your petitioners therefore pray:

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

And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray, by Senators Bonner, Davidson and Melzer.

Petitions received.

Invalid Pensioners

To the Honourable President and Members of the Senate assembled.

Petitioners of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth:

The current review of invalid pensioners by the Department of Social Security is being conducted in an atmosphere of intimidation and harassment. While we do not wish to reflect on the staff of the Department, the Director General of Social Security. P. J. Lanigan, has stated that the present number of invalid pensioners ‘seems rather higher than might have been expected from the normal growth in the people eligible for this benefit.’ The clear implication is that the Department should seek to reduce the number of invalid pensioners. Further, the Director-General’s directive that the state of the labour market must be disregarded’ is absurd when disabled people are victimised in the labour market and when there is a permanent high level of unemployment.

Review of invalid pensioners by the Department of Social Security should emphasise people’s needs and entitlements and how to increase services and their access to services.

Your petitioners humbly pray, by Senator Messner.

Petition received.

page 1426

QUESTION

PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY

The PRESIDENT:

– In view of the many public statements which have been made recently in connection with a staff member of the Department of the Parliamentary Library, I wish to make a brief statement to the Senate. On 13 March this year Mr Dunn, the Director of the Foreign Affairs Group of the Legislative Research Service within the Library, sent a minute to the Parliamentary Librarian, Mr Weir, in which he referred to the possibility of his receiving a visiting fellowship at the University of Adelaide and to the question of his being granted leave without pay for 12 months to take up the position. Mr Dunn indicated that the proposal appeared to be ‘ firming up ‘ and that it was possible that the fellowship would commence in late June or early July. He also stated:

As my career moves into its last phase, I feel the need for rejuvenation, as well as an opportunity to be away from the pace and pressures of work in Parliament House.

On 2 April, following further advice from Mr Dunn, the matter was discussed between him and Mr Weir and Mr Dunn was advised that a way had been found for him to take the necessary leave because, owing to the retirement of another officer, there was a position of equal level, status and salary and with the same subject specialities to which he could be transferred prior to his taking leave. On 8 April, Mr Weir confirmed the transfer and its implications in writing to Mr Dunn.

On 10 April Mr Dunn wrote to Mr Weir advising that he wished to remain in his present post. On 14 April he was advised that the transfer would not take place, as the proposal to transfer had been arranged in accordance with departmental practice and policy to accommodate Mr Dunn ‘s wishes in connection with the proposed university appointment and the leave involved. I repeat what I said when this matter first received public attention, that is, that it was, and is, one of internal departmental management administration. It is not one in which there has been any outside pressure, political or otherwise.

For the information of honourable senators I table and, with the concurrence of honourable senators, incorporate in Hansard relevant documents received by me yesterday from the Parliamentary Librarian which I trust will assist interested persons in their consideration of the matter.

The documents read as follows-

Parliament of Australia

Department of the Parliamentary Library 1 4 April, 1980.

Mr President

TRANSFER OF MR J. S. DUNN LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH SPECIALIST GRADE 5

(Local Designation: Director, Foreign Affairs Group) Department of the Parliamentary Library

Mr James Stanley Dunn commenced duty in this Department on 14 August, 1969, as a Legislative Research Specialist Grade 3 under the supervision of the Director of the Defence Group. On 28 May, 1971, he was promoted to the position of Legislative Research Specialist Grade 5, and given the local designation of ‘Director, Foreign Affairs Group, Legislative Research Service ‘, Position No. 76.

On 13 March, 1980, Mr Dunn sent me a minute (Document A attached) in which he reported that a proposal for a Fellowship for twelve months at the University of Adelaide now appears to be firming up’. He stated inter alia that he felt ‘the need for rejuvenation, as well as an opportunity to be away from the pace and pressures of work in Parliament House’.

On 9 April, 1980, further to a discussion on 2 April, he was handed a letter dated the previous day (Document B attached) in which it was confirmed that, with effect from Monday, 1 4 April, 1 980, he would be transferred to duties as a Special Projects Officer, Position No. 120. The object of this move was to accommodate Mr Dunn ‘s wishes, consistent with overall policy of the Department on Leave Without Pay.

Today I received the attached letter (Document C) from Mr Dunn, in which he states, inter alia, that he wishes to remain in his present post.

As the proposed transfer was designed to meet Mr Dunn’s own situation, he will not be transferred now from his present position. However, he cannot be granted leave without pay while in that position.

No political pressure has been put on me in this matter or on any other Library or research matters by the Prime Minister or any member of the Cabinet.

Allegations of political motives in the transfer are quite wrong. You and Mr Dunn both know that I am of the opinion that Mr Dunn’s public activities and statements are inappropriate for a Parliamentary Officer in his position. At timesI have asked him for explanations but I have not attempted to restrict his private activities, although his performance on duty and the duties he performs fall within the area of my responsibility.

A similar communication has been sent to Mr Speaker.

H.G. WEIR

Commonwealth Parliamentary Librarian

Department of the Parliamentary Library A Mr H. Weir(through Mr MacLean)

VISITING FELLOWSHIP AT UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE

Some weeks ago I raised with you the possibility of my receiving a visiting Fellowship at the University of Adelaide. Further discussion of this possibility has taken place, and I am able to report that the proposal now appears to be firming up. Only today I had a lengthy telephone discussion with the Vice-Chancellor, Professor Stranks, who informed me that my written response to the original proposal had been accepted by the administration, and was fully supported by him. The Vice-Chancellor expressed his full support for my nomination, and said that the matter would finally be resolved in about three or four weeks.

The Fellowship will carry the title Distinguished Visiting Fellow in Residence, and it will last for one year. Under the proposal the University will pay my normal salary, plus an allowance to help me meet extra expenses involved in going to Adelaide, and presumably being separated from my family for at least some of the time. The Vice-Chancellor suggested that the Fellowship might start at about the end of June or early July. During the twelve months period I will complete my book on East Timor, and deliver a number of lectures on general aspects of international relations.

If all goes well, I propose to apply for one year’s leave without pay. I have been informed by an officer of the appropriate division of the Public Service Board, that, in the case of a Public Service Department, leave without pay in these circumstances would come within the terms of section 72A of the Public Service Act, according to which such leave counts as service for all purposes except recreation leave. This would mean that I would continue to contribute to superannuation, and that the leave would count as service.

As you know, I have now been in the Public Service for more than twenty five years and, although I have been involved in research-related work for nearly all of that time, I have neither sought nor obtained leave without pay for such a purpose before. As my career moves into its last phase, I feel the need for rejuvenation, as well as an opportunity to be away from the pace and pressures of work in Parliament House. I suggest that the University of Adelaide will offer an appropriate environment for this purpose, as well as an opportunity to develop a deeper understanding among the teaching staff of important aspects of Australian Foreign Policy, that are often neglected in formal academic studies.

S.DUNN Director Foreign Affairs Group 3 March 1980 re: Professor Stranks agreed that it would be appropri- atetoinform you of the position.

C. Mr MACLEAN B

Mr BRAY

Mr SIMMONS

Parliament of Australia

Department of the Parliamentary Library 8 April 1980

Dear Jim,

After our long discussion last Wednesday evening it was understood that you were to talk with me again on Monday 14 April 1980 about the kinds of Foreign Affairs projects in which you would like to engage as a ‘Special Projects Officer’. Because our discussion ranged over a wide area and also because you are on leave today and I shall be away on duty until next Monday it seems desirable to make my decisions clear to you in writing.

In response to wishes you have previously expressed to me and others you are to be freed from responsibilty for a Research Group administration and given time for in-depth research and writing.

You will be transferred from Position No. 76 in the Legislative Research Service to Position No. 120 and designated as a Special Projects Officer with effect from the commencement of business on Monday 14 April 1980. In that position you will be subject, as at present, to the supervision of the Senior Research Director, Position No. 129.

Your occupation of that position will remove what would otherwise have been an impediment within present policy to the granting of leave without pay for the one-year Fellowship at Adelaide University which you have told me you are keen to accept if it becomes available.

Until further notice you will be located in the presently vacant office which is situated within the working area allocated to the Statistics Group in the Parliamentary Annex.

In your new position you will, of course, continue to have access to the resources of the Library including serials on the distribution list and daily newspapers but not the communications from the Department of Foreign Affairs.

The duties on which you are to be engaged will be discussed with you as we arranged. You will not undertake duties other than those assigned to you, without the concurrence of the Senior Research Director, and the completion of requests you already had in hand on 2 April 1980. Requests which formerly came to you as Director of the Foreign Affairs Group of the Legislative Research Service are to be handled by the Foreign Affairs Group of the Legislative Research Service according to the usual routine.

Yours sincerely, H.G. WEIR

Commonwealth Parliamentary Librarian

MrJ.S. Dunn,

Legislative Research Service, Parliament House, Canberra

The Parliament of the Commonwealth The Library

Canberra, A.C.T.

To Mr Weir

CORRECTION

The Title of my minute of 10 April should read . . . Position No. 120 and not ‘. . . Position No. 76 ‘. I regret the error. Would you kindly make the correction accordingly.

J.S.DUNN

11 April 1980

Department of the Parliamentary Library

MINUTE PAPER

to Mr H. Weir,

Subject: Proposed transfer to Position No. 76

I have now read your letter of 8 April, 1 980. I wish to inform you that I cannot accept the arrangements you have outlined in the letter, nor your presentation of some aspects of the discussion we had on Wednesday 2 April. It was my understanding that the proposal you had in mind would be discussed further on Monday 14 April, yet it is apparent from your letter that you chose to make a decision in the meantime, the consequences of which are clearly serious both for me and for the Parliamentary Library as a whole. I regret to say that I regard your move to make that decision without further negotiation as an abrogation of a verbal agreement. May I remind you that before I left you on 2 April, I had informed you that I was very disturbed at some aspects of the proposal to move me, but that in deference to you I wished to consider it seriously, and to have some days in which to reflect on it before a final decision was made. May I also say that such a procedure is common to most moves of this kind in the public service. It is certainly the case when a disciplinary action is involved, and you will recall that you repeatedly assured me that my transfer was not for disciplinary reasons, and had nothing to do with the issues of East Timor and the so-called ‘ONA Affair’.

When I returned from the coast on Tuesday evening my transfer had already become a subject of interest in the press some of whose representatives had already established to their satisfaction that it was being carried out for political reasons. Although you denied this at the time and have since continued to deny it, some of your own remarks during our discussion plus your description of the position I am now listed to occupy, strongly suggest that there are political motives for my removal. May I recall, that in our discussion of the sort of work the new position would entail, you stressed that I would not be permitted to write on East Timor. In your letter, you have specified that in this position, although 1 would continue to have access to the resources of the Library, I would not have access to the communications from the Department of Foreign Affairs. This is to me an extraordinary step to take, particularly as most communications from the Department of Foreign Affairs are unclassified. It is also extraordinaary because this arrangement was in fact negotiated by me some years ago on a personal basis, and at no stage has the Department suggested that it be terminated.

Your description of the duties of the position in the letter of 8 April differs substantially from the impression I gained at our earlier discussion. It is clear from your letter that I would have limited access, and this limitation, particularly to material from the Department of Foreign Affairs, would limit the scope of my research. Your letter implies that I would not have contact with members of parliament. In effect my long experience in the area of foreign affairs would be completely wasted, and would be irrelevant to the work of the research service, at a time when the Foreign Affairs Group is under greater pressure than ever before in its history.

Your letter also seriously misrepresents an important aspect of our discussion. In your second paragraph you say that I am to be free from my present responsibilities in response to wishes I had previously expressed to you and others. This is simply untrue. You raised this very matter during our discussion, and I emphatically informed you that I was quite happy with my present position and was content to remain here. I also informed you that at no stage had I hinted that I would like to be replaced as director of the Foreign Affairs Group. What I have said in the past is that all specialists in the Research Service could benefit from a break in their work here. What I envisaged, and indeed proposed, was that officers of this Group from time to time be given the opportunity to spend some months, or perhaps one year, in the Department of Foreign Affairs, or in a university, in order to broaden their experience in foreign affairs work. As you are aware, 1 am the only officer of this group to have served in the Department of Foreign Affairs. I have placed on record my belief that our specialists should develop detailed knowledge of the working of the Department of Foreign Affairs, and of diplomacy in general. Again, however, I must restate the fact that I am quite happy in my present position and 1 have no wish to be relieved of my responsibilities. Your suggestion that this is not the case is therefore grossly inaccurate.

As for the question of my obtaining a fellowship at the University of Adelaide, as I repeatedly explained to you, a formal offer has not yet been made, and therefore it is not appropriate that this issue be raised at this stage. May I also remind you that at our discussion I expressed my regret that you felt it necessary to remove officers from their positions in the event of their going on leave without pay for a period of one year. You said you favoured the idea of fellowships and other forms of study leave which would be of benefit to the Library, yet how can this benefit be applied if the officer concerned is not able to return to his post? At our discussion, I did say that if it were necessary for me to vacate this position, why could I not retain it until I left for Adelaide.

It is hardly necessary to say that the events since last Wednesday have caused me and my family considerable distress. I believe that had this matter been handled differently such a situation might never have arisen. What has in fact happened, and emerged from public discussion oft has raised important matters of principle. I thereforew remain in my present post, and to serve the Parliament as have done in the past. If I am in fact offered a fellowship at the University of Adelaide, we will then have an opportunity to renegotiate the circumstances under which I might obtain leave without pay from this Department.

J.S.DUNN, Director, Foreign Affairs Group 10 April 1980

Parliament of Australia

Department of the Parliamentary Library 14 April 1980

Confidential Mr President

MR J. S. DUNN

Reasons for transfer proposal

On 2 April 1980,I sent you a ‘Confidential- For Information’ statement about two matters (Document Al enclosed). The first of those matters simply informed you that Mr Dunn would be transferred to a Special Duties position; it gave no reason for the transfer.

On 6 March 1980,I sent you a note on statements made in Parliament the previous day about information alleged to have been given to the Research Service by Officers of the Office of National Assessments (Document Bl enclosed). In that statement I said that ‘use is made only of information which has been published or is free to be published’. I also said that ‘I personally regard it as improper for any officer of this Department to seek information from any source when that information cannot be published. Furthermore, the name of a client for whom any information is required should not be revealed “.

The decision to transfer Mr Dunn to Special Duties was not related to any political matter, although, as set out in Document C1 (enclosed), I have been concerned for a long period of time about Mr Dunn’s apparent lack of objectivity in his work. In Document CI dated 19 November 1979, I said that I was regarding the matter as a problem of training and supervision and I have continued to adopt that attitude.

Also, for your information, I enclose a copy of the minute which I signed this morning instructing that Mr Dunn would not be transferred today to the Special Duties position (Document Dl). The reason for the original decision to transfer Mr Dunn was as set out in my letter to him on 8 April 1980, which was in response to Mr Dunn’s minute to me of 13 March 1980- both of these documents have already been sent to you.

In media discussions during the last few days, reference has been made to a draft Code of Conduct which is presently being considered by staff. A copy of that draft code is enclosed (Document El ). The date of issue of that document followed a series of discussions which had been held by the Principal Officers of the Department since at least 1 8 September 1979 (see Document Fl enclosed). The draft issued last week was drawn up by senior officers of the Legislative Research Service and drew heavily on guidelines recently issued by the Public Service Board for the conduct of the Public Service.

A similar communication has been sent to Mr Speaker.

G. WEIR

Par,. .Australia

Department. . the Parliamentary Library 2 April 1980

Confidential

Mr Speaker

FOR INFORMATION

This evening I propose to tell Mr J. S. Dunn that with effect from Monday 1 4 April, he will be transferred from his position as Director, Foreign Affairs Group, Legislative Research Service to special duties within the Department of the Parliamentary Library.

In his new duties Mr Dunn will be answerable to the Senior Research Director who will control projects in which Mr Dunn will be engaged.

Further changes involving the Defence Group of the Legislative Research Service will be made known and implemented at a later stage.

I have suggested to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Honourable Andrew Peacock, M.P., that the Australian Government could provide a Parliamentary Library and expert advice in setting up a Legislative Research Service for the new Parliament in Zimbabwe. Because of Australia’s involvement in processes leading up to the formation of the new Parliament this could be an appropriate gesture from Australia.

A similar communication has been sent to Mr President.

H.G. WEIR

Commonwealth Parliamentary Librarian

Noted. I take it this is an internal organisational decision.

A good suggestion. B.M.S. 2.4.80

Parliament of Australia

Department of the Parliamentary Library

B 1

Mr Speaker 6 March 1980

INFORMATION ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO THE RESEARCH SERVICE BY OFFICERS OF THE OFFICE OF NATIONAL ASSESSMENT

Further to the statements in the House yesterday and subsequent references in the media I have called for a written report as to the details from the standpoint of this Department.

In response to enquiries from the media I have said that in the Parliamentary Library and Research Service ‘use is made only of information which has been published or is free to be published’. That policy is made perfectly clear in the attached booklet (page 7, middle paragraph), a copy of which was sent to all Senators and Members at the beginning of the 1 979 Budget session. The policy is not new- it has applied ever since the Research Service was started.

I personally regard it as improper for any officer of this Department to seek information from any source when that information cannot be published. Furthermore, the name of a client for whom any information is required should not be revealed.

I have written in similar terms to Mr President.

Seen. B.M.S. 6.3.80

G. WEIR

Commonwealth Parliamentary Librarian

Parliament of Australia C 1

Department of the Parliamentary Library 19 November 1979

Mr President

For your information I attach an article which appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald on 17 November 1979. It criticises a paper written by Mr James Dunn, the Director of the Foreign Affairs Group of the Legislative Research Service, and suggests that such papers have ‘the imprimatur of Parliament’ and should be disinterested, but claims that the paper misleads, its statements are arguable and complicates relations with Indonesia and the East Timorese Welfare Program.

My concern about Mr Dunn’s apparent lack of objectivity is known to you and has been discussed with him by the Senior Research Director. At this stage I am treating the problem as one of training and supervision.

My immediate concern is that Peter Hastings’ article in the Sydney Morning Herald could not have been written if Mr Uren, M.P., had not tabled the paper in the House.

I have previously expressed my concern about that departure from the convention essential to Research Service operations, that is its anonymity. When papers are provided in response to specific requests the Research Service should not be quoted; if a client wishes to make public the contents, it should be done in his own name. This convention applies to the release of Research Service papers to the Press, as well as to references to them in Parliament.

For information only.

I have also written in these terms to the Speaker.

G. WEIR

Commonwealth Parliamentary Librarian 14 April 1980

D 1

Mr T. W. Lawton

Acting Assistant Secretary (Operations) c.c. Mr Maclean Mr Simmons Mr Bray

STAFF

Mr J. S. Dunn; Legislative Research Specialist Grade 5

Position No. 76

Would you please inform Mr J. S. Dunn that I have decided not to proceed with his transfer today to Position No. 120, (‘Special Projects Officer’).

H.G. WEIR

Commonwealth Parliamentary Librarian

Parliament of E

Department of the Parliamentary Library

All Members of Staff

Department of the Parliamentary Library

CODE OF CONDUCT

On 14 March 1980 the Office of the Public Service Board issued PSB Circular No. 1980/6 entitled ‘Committee of Inquiry concerning Public Duty and Private InterestImplementation of Report’. This document contained the recommendations of the Bowen Committee set up in 1 978.

Included in these recommendations is a ‘Code of Conduct’, consisting of ten points, and a copy of this proposed Code is attached.

As this Code, for the Public Service generally, has been issued now, it seems to be an appropriate moment for this Department to issue a Code of Conduct of its own tailored, however, to the situation that applies in a Department of this Parliament.

While visiting the US Congressional Research Service last year, I found that a code had recently been adopted there although it had much wider appreciation than the proposal for our purposes. It was particularly concerned with matters which are not so relevant here.

The draft Code of Conduct for the Department of the Parliamentary Library is attached for discussion. The existence of such a Code is a pre-supposition of the Management Review. I should like to have your comments and suggestions please by Tuesday 22 April 1980.

H.G. WEIR

8 April 1980 Parliamentary Librarian

Department of the Parliamentary Library CODE OF CONDUCT

General

The staff of the Department of the Parliamentary Library are employed under the Public Service Act and are subject to the provisions of the Public Service (Parliamentary Officers) Regulations. They should also be aware of the Draft Guidelines for Public Servants. In the performance of their duties, the staff are ultimately responsible to the Permanent Head of the Department.

The duty of the staff” is to serve the needs of the elected Senators and Members of Parliament and its Committees by the provision of information facilities and research services. The loyalty of staff as officers of a Parliamentary Department must be to the Parliament. All members of Parliament must be assured of impartial courteous and efficient service without consideration of personal or political affiliation.

Provision of Information

At Member’s Request

Staff, in performing their duties, should seek, within the framework of Departmental Policies and procedures, to meet the needs of their clients as their clients perceive them. They should not seek to initiate client requests, nor to seek to educate clients to a particular point of view, nor allow personal convictions to determine the type of response.

By Appropriate Staff Member

Staff should ensure that the Members’ information and research requests arc handled by the most appropriate staff.

Confidentiality Aspects

Staff should at all times maintain complete confidentiality in respect of clients ‘ requests.

In turn, the conventions of the Department discourage clients from attributing material or opinions to the Legislative Research Service particularly when such answers have been tailored to meet specific requirements.

Impartiality and Balance

Clients should always be able to have complete confidence in the impartiality and balance of the services they receive from staff

Published or Publishable

Information given to clients by staff must be either published material or material that is free to be published. The sources of information should always be quoted. Confidential information should never form part of a response.

Activities of Staff

Public and/or Political

Public activities of staff should not be such as to disturb client confidence. Staff, as citizens, have the right to participate in the political life of the community, but should be aware that the acceptance of public office in a political party or active involvement in party political causes could affect clients’ perception of the Department as an impartial information and research service. Public political activities should be restricted if these could affect the Department’s reputation.

Public comment on issues

Public comment by members of staff on current issues could alienate some of the Department’s clients. Where such public comment is felt by a staff member to be inescapable, it should be made clear that the views expressed are personal and in no way associated with the Department, nor with the official position within the Department of that staff member.

Partisan Political Viewpoint

When on duty members of staff should not by word or by display of material express a partisan political viewpoint.

Publication of Articles Written

Members of staff who wish to write articles for publication in learned or other journals are encouraged to do so but as a general rule such articles should be written outside working hours and the resources of the Department are not to be used except with the express permission of the Permanent Head. Regulations do not permit acceptance of a fee for such publications without official approval. If the place of work is given, there should be a disclaimer that the views expressed are those of the author and not the Department. Positions held should be described accurately.

Professional Activities

Professional activities of staff which enhance efficiency and update skills are encouraged, but these should not be allowed to cause a conflict of interests. In the case of conflict the interests of the Department should come first.

Professional Organisations

Staff are encouraged to join professional organisations represented in the Department but in the event of industrial action should have due regard to their loyalty to the Parliament and the necessity to maintain an impartial political stance in the perception of their clients.

Staff Relationships with Clients

Members not to be lobbied

Staff, in accordance with the prescribed regulations, should not use their proximity to Members of Parliament to lobby for a particular political or personal cause nor seek to involve Members in Departmental matters.

Staff and the Media

Members of staff must always safeguard the confidentiality and interests of the Department’s clients in any relationships with the Press. No staff may comment to the Press on matters affecting the Department.

Attachment to PSB Circular No. A80/6.

GUIDELINES CONCERNING THE CODE OF CONDUCT AND OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BOWEN COMMITTEE

Code of Conduct

The Code of Conduct proposed by the Bowen Committee consists of ten principles to promote the avoidance of conflicts of interest, pecuniary or otherwise, and provide a basis for their resolution where necessary. The Government has endorsed the Code in respect of Ministers of State and their staff, members of the Defence Forces, public servants and statutory office-holders. The principles arc:

An office-holder should perform the duties of his office impartially, uninfluenced by fear or favour.

An office-holder should be frank and honest in official dealings with colleagues.

An office-holder should avoid situations in which his private interest, whether pecuniary or otherwise, conflicts or might reasonably be thought to conflict with his public duty.

When an office-holder possesses, directly or indirectly, an interest which conflicts or might reasonably be thought to conflict with his public duty, or improperly to influence his conduct in the discharge of his responsibilities in respect of some matter with which he is concerned, he should disclose that interest according to the prescribed procedures. Should circumstances change after an initial disclosure has been made, so that new or additional facts become material, the office-holder should disclose the further information.

When the interests of members of his immediate family are involved, the office-holder should disclose those interests, to the extent that they are known to him.

When an office-holder possesses an interest which conflicts or might reasonably be thought to conflict with the duties of his office and such interest is not prescribed as a qualification for that office, he should forthwith divest himself of that interest, secure his removal from the duties in question, or obtain the authorisation of his superior or colleagues to continue to discharge the duties.

An office-holder should not use information obtained in the course of official duties to gain directly or indirectly a pecuniary advantage for himself or for any other person.

8 ) An office-holder should not:

solicit or accept from any person any remuneration or benefit for the discharge of the duties of his office over and above the official remuneration;

b ) solicit or accept any benefit, advantage or promise of future advantage whether for himself, his immediate family or any business concern or trust with which he is associated from persons who are in, or seek to be in, any contractual or special relationship with government;

except as may be permitted under the rules applicable to his office, accept any gift, hospitality or concessional travel offered in connection with the discharge of the duties of his office.

An office-holder should be scrupulous in his use of public property and services, and should not permit their misuse by other persons.

An office-holder should not allow the pursuit of his private interest to interfere with the proper discharge of his public duties.’

The Code emphasises the importance of self-regulation in matters of conflict of interest. The onus is on the individual staff member to be alert to any actual or potential conflict of interest, pecuniary or otherwise, and take steps to neutralise it. Failure to observe the principles set out in the Code may constitute misconduct and so may give rise to disciplinary action under the Public Service Act.

F 1

Department of the Parliamentary Library

Minute Paper

1974/57

Note for File

For sometime I have been concerned at the evidence that there is a need for a code of ethics and/or professional conduct in this Department. Various statements on the subject have been collected and during my recent overseas study tour I discussed the matter of professional conduct of Parliamentary Officers ‘ with a number of people in the Parliamentary Service. In particular, the recent Act was accepted as definitive in Washington, D.C.

It is clear that the indiscretions of some members of our staff, newspaper publicity in August 1979 about a research paper prepared by the F.I.T.D. Group and other matters have caused some doubts as to the integrity and political objectivity of the Department as a whole.

There are no sanctions which can be applied against people whose behaviour is questionable in terms of professional practice and while it is true that careful screening at the point of recruitment may prevent later indiscretions this is no solution to the indiscretions of permanent officers already in the Service.

Today I have told Mr. MacLean, Mr. Lawton and Mr. Brudenall of my concern about this matter and my belief that the time has come for us to provide a statement of acceptable practice and ethics in this Department. This should at least provide the guidelines and be useful in recruitment procedures. It could also demonstrate to others our awareness of the need for desirable standards.

I have suggested that the best way to handle this may be to set up a working party within the Department to study the matter and to consider the statements of practices and ethics put forward by professional associations and to consider the special circumstances particularly those relating to political objectivity, which should apply in a Department such as this.

I should like the Presiding Officers to know that such a Committee has been set up.

G. WEIR Parliamentary Librarian 18 September 1979

Senator WRIEDT:
Leader of the Opposition · Tasmania

– by leave- It is unusual, as I am sure we all realise, for a statement of this nature to be presented to the Senate. What concerns me is that no prior notice whatsoever was given to the Opposition that the statement would be made. In fact, I was under the impression that no statement was to be made by you, Mr President. That was the information given to me when I came in to the Senate. Considerable supporting material has been incorporated in Hansard. Obviously, it is impossible for anyone to comment on it immediately. I trust that the Leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator Carrick) will give the Senate the opportunity to debate this material, either later today or tomorrow, if we in the Opposition or the Senate collectively feel that it should be the subject of debate.

As you say, Mr President, the matters raised are of considerable public concern. Therefore, I do not think that they ought to be passed over lightly. They should certainly not be passed over in the light of this material that has been presented to the Senate and your statement, Mr President. I do not know whether the Leader of the Government in the Senate will care to respond now. I believe that the Senate should have the opportunity to debate the matter at a time, either today or tomorrow, that we can determine, presumably mutually.

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesLeader of the Government in the Senate · LP

– by leave- The difficulty with debating this matter today, of course, is that the Estimates committees will sit. Otherwise, I would have been happy to suggest that the matter could be debated at, say, 10 o’clock tonight. However, the Senate will sit at 10.15 p.m. before adjourning. If Senator Wriedt were to indicate to me that he wanted to make a statement and if within that compass there were no need for an extensive debate, we could deal with the matter at that time. Alternatively, judging what is required, I will try to fit in a debate at another time, but it will be possible to debate the matter today at 10.15 p.m., perhaps for a quarter of an hour.

Senator WRIEDT (Tasmania- Leader of the Opposition)- by leave- I do not think it is possible for us to come to an agreement as quickly as the Leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator Carrick) has indicated. I hope that after Question Time I can talk to Senator Carrick and that we will be able to agree on something then.

page 1433

QUESTION

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

page 1433

QUESTION

SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE

Senator WRIEDT:

-I ask the Minister representing the Prime Minister: Is the Govern^ ment satisfied with the state of security and intelligence arrangements in this country at the present time?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– I suppose that no government is ever wholly satisfied with the state of security. Governments are always keen that matters of security should be strengthened. I take it that Senator Wriedt is referring to a matter concerning the Office of National Assessments. As I understand it, the Director-General of ONA invited the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation to study the security of ONA and to report upon any weaknesses that might lie there. I am not aware of any suggestion that any definitive defects have been detected in ONA.

page 1433

QUESTION

AFGHANISTAN

Senator BONNER:
QUEENSLAND

-My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs. I refer the Minister’s attention to a recent report alleging that Western intelligence sources expect the Kremlin to depose Barbrak Karmal, the puppet leader it installed as president of Afghanistan some three months ago, and that his possible successor, it is mooted, will be chosen from a group of Afghanistan leftists recently released from prison in Afghanistan. Can the Minister advise the Senate whether this report is correct? If so, is the Minister aware of the name of the possible successor or his antecedents? Has he any other information in his possession relating to this Soviet quisling?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– I do not have first-hand information on the matter. In looking at the recent history of Afghanistan, I must say that the Kremlin has not always made public beforehand its despatch of Afghanistan leaders. But in case there is some reasonably authoritative information available, I will invite my colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, in another place to see whether he can give me answers to the questions that Senator Bonner has posed.

page 1433

QUESTION

AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE FORCE ACADEMY

Senator BUTTON:
VICTORIA

-I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Defence whether it is a fact that on 26 March this year the Minister for Defence wrote to the Vice-Chancellor of the University of New South Wales querying whether it was necessary or desirable to move in one step from the present situation of separate service colleges to one independent tri-service academy. I ask whether, in that letter, the Minister suggested:

The urgent need to consolidate the education of cadets could be satisfied by establishing an institution which suitably governed and developed, could evolve to a point where the ultimate transition to autonomy would be simply the recognition of its effective status.

Did the Minister ask the University to consider setting up a college to serve the above purpose and ‘ensure the academic integrity of the institute ‘? Is this a back-door way of setting up Casey University military academy? Is it the fall back position of the Minister for Defence in the case of a decision not to proceed with this academy? What is the Government’s position on this matter, as of today?

Senator DURACK:
Attorney-General · WESTERN AUSTRALIA · LP

– I am not aware of the letter that the Minister for Defence has written to the University of New South Wales to which Senator Button refers. The Government’s attitude on this matter is known. It is discussing with universities the question of some association between the academy and a university institution as an alternative to the actual establishment of a separate university, as proposed, with the name of Casey University. The Government has made clear its position, that is, it supports the concept of the Australian Defence Force Academy. The Minister made a statement to the Parliament in response to the report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Public Works. No doubt that matter will be the subject of further debate within the party and the Parliament. But as I understand it, the Government is having specific discussions in relation to an association ofthe academy with a university. Presumably the letter to which Senator Button refers was written in pursuance of that policy. I will refer the question to the Minister for Defence and ask for more specific details in relation to the matter raised by Senator Button.

Senator BUTTON:

– I wish to ask a supplementary question. Is it not a fact that at the weekend the Minister for Defence told the Liberal Party conference, as reported in the Press, that the tri-service academy, as an autonomous institution, was essential to the future defence of Australia and that he would fight for it to the bitter end? He used words to that effect.

Senator DURACK:

-The Government has made it clear that it believes it is of the utmost importance to have an Australian Defence Force Academy which would be an institution in itself. The question is whether it would be a separate university institution or whether it would be associated with a university institution.

page 1434

DISTINGUISHED VISITOR

The PRESIDENT:

– Order! I have very much pleasure in drawing the attention of honourable senators to the presence in my gallery of a former member of this place, the highly esteemed and respected Mr Pat Kennelly. On behalf of all honourable senators, I tender a very warm welcome to you. It is good to see you back in the chamber.

page 1434

QUESTION

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

page 1434

QUESTION

IMPORTS OF CHINESE OIL

Senator PETER BAUME:
NEW SOUTH WALES

-My question is directed to the Minister for National Development and Energy. Did the New South Wales Premier, during his recent trip to the People’s Republic of China, issue a Press release to the effect that Australian oil companies had committed what he called a great error in rejecting the prospect of Chinese oil? Is the Minister aware of Mr Wran’s claim that, as he put it, he would like to reverse a bad decision of a few years ago, or of his other claim that, in his words, there is the possibility of Chinese oil exports to Australia? Is it a fact that Australian oil companies and the Australian Government have neglected opportunities to import Chinese oil? Is the Minister able to say whether there is a possibility, in the short term, of Chinese oil exports to Australia and whether Chinese oil is suitable for refining and use in Australia in large quantities? In short, I ask whether Mr Wran has dealt accurately in this matter with the Australian Press and the Australian public?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– I have read a number of media statements by the New South Wales Premier regarding Chinese oil. The fact is that both the Australian Government and Australian refiners have shown considerable interest over the years in Chinese crude oil. However, of the three types of oil potentially available from China, none is suitable for use in Australian refineries. Taching crude is the only one that is remotely suitable. It produces 40 per cent fuel oil compared with 20 per cent fuel oil from Saudi Arabian light crude and 5 per cent fuel oil from Bass Strait crude. Such a large volume of fuel oil in the Sydney market would be an embarrassment, and substantial volumes would have to be exported. The refinery balance for light products would also be upset, leading to a requirement to import those products in order to meet the market demand.

In summary, Chinese crude oils, which are very waxy, are extremely heavy for the Australian market, with its low demand for fuel oil. Taching crude is solid at room temperature, and investment in handling facilities, which would require two to three years to install, would be very costly. Furthermore, we are advised that Taching crude commands a premium price in Japan, where there is a high demand for fuel oil and where its low sulphur properties are valuable. We are also advised that there is little or no surplus production available in the short term for additional export markets although this will change as the Chinese production facilities increase later in the 1 980s. Whilst the Government would be very pleased to see trade with China increased, the suggestion by Mr Wran of largescale imports of oil from China does not appear realistic at this stage. The Government, as it has in the past, will keep in touch with China on this matter. We will always be interested to receive any offers of quality oil which can be handled in the refineries at a price suitable to enable the Australian people to get petrol at the very interestingly low price that it is today.

page 1434

QUESTION

PETROL PRICE RISES

Senator CHIPP:

– I preface my question to the Minister for National Development and Energy by commenting that the Minister will remember conceding to me, in answer to a question, that oil companies were selling petrol in their own outlets at some cents below the price set by the Prices Justification Tribunal. I believe that he also conceded that this practice at least put in doubt the accuracy of the price set by the Prices Justification Tribunal. Because this means that oil companies could be making super profits of several million dollars a month, why did the Minister send telexes to oil companies reminding them to apply to the Prices Justification Tribunal for price rises? How does this fit in with the fight against inflation? To be consistent, will this Minister therefore send telexes to trade union leaders inviting them to apply to the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission for wage rises when inflation increases as a result?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

-I recall Senator Chipp ‘s previous question, and my reply that the Government, with some draft legislation, was testing the community’s views with regard to franchises for independent operators and was looking at the whole question of the relationship -

Senator Chipp:

– That has been going on for 1 8 months.

Senator CARRICK:

-No, the draft legislation has been in circulation, subject to correction, for less than two months. I imagine it is in that order of time. It is true that some oil companies are discounting, probably to a degree that independent operators could not do because they would not be buying the oil wholesale at that price. Having said that I have to say that I did not send a telex inviting the oil companies to approach the Prices Justification Tribunal. I have the full telex here if any honourable senator wishes to see it. I said:

I understand that your company may wish to approach the PJT to have compensatory adjustments made to the prices of other petroleum products which you produce. I expect such adjustments will be marginal and, in those circumstances, your company may wish to approach the PJT at a convenient time in the future when other cost claims might be made.

In other words we had discussed with the companies what we were doing. We had told them that any price rise would be marginal. What my telex said was that any price rise would be so marginal that we suggested that they not approach the PJT now but wait until they have a future reason for approaching the PJT. That is what, in plain words, was said. Some of the oil companies said: ‘No, we intend to approach the PJT now ‘. In other words, the reverse of what the media has taken this to mean was done. The Government realised that they had the right to approach the PJT. We suggested that the companies not approach it now but wait until a future opportunity arises. I am bound to say that this matter has been grossly misunderstood. The fact of the matter is, as honourable senators are aware, that there is a report. I would be very happy to have the clear situation exposed to the Senate. I understand from the media that yesterday the PJT- in response. I think, to an approach by BP Australia Ltd- said that the maximum increase would be 0. 1 8 cents for a litre of petrol.

The fact of the matter is that when the PJT made its decision in January it most heavily overloaded the price of liquefied petroleum gas, thereby virtually subsidising other products. Past figures show that when the price of LPG was $1 1 0 a tonne the price of indigenous oil was $ 1 08 a tonne. When LPG was $147 a tonne indigenous oil was $147 a tonne. However, in January when the PJT virtually doubled the price of LPG to $252 a tonne, it was some 28 per cent higher than the price of indigenous crude which was $196 a tonne. It is now by Government arrangement at $205 a tonne which is a much closer approximation to the figure of $196. This is a very sensible and appropriate arrangement. The Government did not approach the PJT in the terms suggested by Senator Chipp.

Senator CHIPP:

– I wish to ask the Minister for National Development and Energy a supplementary question. Does the telex to which he referred constitute the substance of his conversations with the oil companies? Will he incorporate the telex in Hansard)

Senator CARRICK:

– I am perfectly happy to incorporate the telex in Hansard. On the same day as the Press statement was made I advised a variety of institutions in Australia about what the Government’s policy would be. The telex contains basically nothing other than that information. I will be happy to incorporate the telex itself. The Government regards liquefied petroleum gas as a premium fuel.

Senator Chipp:

- Mr President, I raise a point of order. With the greatest respect to the Minister, my supplementary question simply asked whether the Minister would incorporate the telex- I thank him for being prepared to do that- and whether the telex represents the substance of the total conversations he has had with the oil companies on the matter of the price of petrol. The question had nothing to do with LPG.

The PRESIDENT:

– There is no point of order. Senator Carrick, will you seek leave to incorporate the document to which you have referred?

Senator CARRICK:

-I thought I did.

The PRESIDENT:

– No, you did not.

Senator CARRICK:

– I seek leave to incorporate the document in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The document read as follows-

DEPARTMENT OF MINERALS AND ENERGY

Message No. Telex No.

Received am/pm 19 Time Sent am/pm Return to: Mr D. Ives At Room 406

OUTWARDS TELEPRINTER/TELEGRAM

File Ref

CLASSIFICATION: RESTRICTED TO:

FROM: J. L. CARRICK, Minister, Department of National Development and Energy

TO: Mr P. Ross, Amoco Australia-AA2068 1 AMOCAUS

Mr A. E. Harris, Ampol Petroleum Ltd;AA21252 AMPOLCO

Mr A. W. Gorrie. BP Australia Ltd;AA30166 AUSTBP

Mr J. A. Landels, Caltex Oil Australia Pty Ltd- AA20502 CALTEX

Mr J. F. Kirk, Esso Australia Ltd;AA20549 ESSO

Mr J. B. Leslie, Mobil Oil Australia Ltd-AA30307 MOBOIL

Mr L. T. Froggatt, Shell Group, Melbourne ;AA30973 SHELL

LPG

As you know from recent discussions with departmental officers, the Government has been considering proposals in relation to the pricing of LPG. I appreciate your company’s contribution to those discussions which have helped to provide the Government with valuable information determining a pricing policy for LPG which I shall be announcing today.

The principal elements of that policy in relation to refinery produced LPG are that:

the maximum justified wholesale price for LPG exrefinery gate, at all refineries, for both propane and butane (other than for petrochemical or nontraditional usage), shall be established at a level not exceeding the price at which naturally occurring LPG (other than as a feedstock in the petrochemical industry or in non-traditional industrial uses) will be sold in the domestic market from Long Island Point, that is $205 per tonne.

future adjustments in the maximum justified wholesale price for both propane and butane, established in accordance with (i) above, will be made in accordance with the percentage increase in the price of indigenous crude oil from the Gippsland fields as announced from time to time by the Minister for National Development and Energy; and

the maximum justified wholesale price for both propane and butane established in accordance with (i) and (ii) above shall not exceed the price received by Esso and BHP for the sale by those companies of exported naturally occurring propane.

In the context of the pricing policy expressed above, the Government is requesting you to adjust the price of exrefinery LPG with effect from tomorrow, 9 April 1980, to $205 per tonne ex-refinery gate. A similar request is being made to the producers of naturally occurring LPG in respect ofthe Long Island Point price.

I understand that your company may wish to approach the PJT to have compensatory adjustments made to the prices of other petroleum products which you produce. I expect such adjustments will be marginal and, in those circumstances, your company may wish to approach the PJT at a convenient time in the future when other cost claims might be made.

An appropriate directive to the PJT will be made by the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, stating the pricing policy the Government is adopting.

I will be issuing a full policy statement on LPG pricing and related matters later today.

Authorised by D. J. Ives Date 8.4.80

Senator Georges:

– Will the Minister also table it so that we can have access to it straight away?

Senator CARRICK:

– I would be very happy to table it. In fact, I will get copies made of it if that is desired. Over the course of the past three or four weeks considerable discussions have taken place with the whole of the oil industry, including the producers at Cooper Basin and Bass Strait and the refiners, regarding LPG. This telex contains the final resolution. I am bound to say that the companies had been informed of our proposals and had the opportunity to comment on them prior to my sending the telex. But it is indeed a frank statement of the discussions and the dialogue with the companies.

page 1436

QUESTION

DAM BUSTERS SQUADRON REUNION

Senator YOUNG:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

-I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs whether he recalls my question of a few weeks ago with regard to customs duty being charged on lapel badges, ties and plaques for the Dam Busters Squadron, which will shortly be holding its final reunion in Australia. As I have had no response on this matter from the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs and as the reunion is to take place in a few days, will the Minister endeavour to get a response on this matter from his colleague?

Senator DURACK:
LP

-I recall Senator Young asking that question. I regret that he has not had a reply to it. I will certainly get in touch with the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs as soon as I can and see whether I can expedite such a reply, bearing in mind the urgency of the matter.

page 1436

QUESTION

PRICE RISES: OIL

Senator WRIEDT:

– My question is directed to the Minister for National Development and Energy. In the telex that he has just incorporated in Hansard he says:

I understand that your company may wish to approach the PJT . . .

I ask the Minister: Was the initial approach made to him by the companies, was some indication given to him or did he make the initial approach himself?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– During the discussions with the companies on the implementation of this matter a number of companies indicated to officers of my Department that if we took the steps that we did take they would approach the Prices Justification Tribunal to get a determination on the matter. With that knowledge, I indicated to them in my reply that I understood that that may be their intention but I suggested to them that they may in fact defer that approach until they had more substantial reason to go to the PJT. My judgment on that matter was impeccable. There is no substantial reason to go to the PJT when the PJT grants a maximum rise of 0. 18c a litre. That, of course, is not of substance at all.

Senator WRIEDT:

- Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Am I to understand that the Minister, in sending this telex to the oil companies, in fact was responding to a verbal initiative by one or more of those companies?

Senator CARRICK:

-Firstly, let me make it clear that I did not recommend to the oil companies at any time that they go to the Prices Justification Tribunal for a determination on this matter. Some of them indicated that to my officers. In the telex I sent, with that knowledge, I suggested to them that they should delay their approach to the PJT. That is what those words say.

page 1437

QUESTION

OFFICE OF NATIONAL ASSESSMENTS

Senator JESSOP:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

-I ask the Leader of the Government in the Senate whether his attention has been drawn to a statement by Mr Andrew Campbell, a former officer of the Office of National Assessments, which was issued in Canberra yesterday and which was the subject of an interview on the Australian Broadcasting Commission program AM this morning. Is the Minister aware that in this statement it is suggested that a covert counter Afghanistan policy was operating from ONA and from the office of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition? Further, is he aware that the statements alleged that these officers were not acting in the interests of the Australian Labor Party, or Australia’s national interest, nor were they covertly encouraging a bipartisan policy, as open channels were in existence for the briefing of Mr Hayden? Also, these officers, it is alleged, were assisting the foreign policy objectives of the Soviet Union from positions of influence and privileged access. If the Minister is aware of this statement, has the Government made any investigations into these allegations? If not, will the Minister see that inquiries are made to make this matter perfectly clear?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

-I have been informed of a wide range of allegations made by Mr Campbell, including those to which Senator Jessop has referred and many more. I understand that the Government has also been advised of a wide range of such allegations. Whilst having no reason to believe that the allegations have an element of truth, the Government must take any allegations seriously, and it intends to do so. At this moment the Government has this matter under review to see what steps it must take arising out of it.

page 1437

QUESTION

OFFICE OF NATIONAL ASSESSMENTS: PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY

Senator BISHOP:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– My question is directed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate who will recall that on 6 March 1 980 1 directed to him a question about the Parliamentary Library research staff arising from the criteria laid down by the Prime Minister following the removal of the two officers from the Office of National Assessments. I put the question to the Minister that there was some suspicion that parliamentary research officers could be inhibited by not being given access to special information which could be transferred and advised to members of Parliament. The Minister will recall that he promised to discuss the matter and to clarify it with the Prime Minister. He expressed the view that he understood that that flow of information would not be disturbed. In view of the publicity, too, about Mr Dunn, I wonder whether the Leader of the Government in the Senate has yet had an occasion to discuss this matter and whether there is any suspicion that our research officers of the library will not be able to give the best advice to members of the Parliament and to the committees.

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– What I did initially was to assure myself that there was no apparent inhibition upon the flow of basic information to research officers and therefore to parliamentarians, but I did not have the time to probe the matter in greater depth than that. I acknowledge now that events of recent days and weeks may make the question even more relevant. May I take the question on notice on that basis and see whether I can get further in-depth information?

page 1437

QUESTION

CUBAN REFUGEES

Senator WATSON:
TASMANIA

– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs. No doubt, the Minister is aware that the

White House has agreed to accept certain Cuban refugees and has urged other countries to do likewise. Will the Australian Government consider the possibility of Australia’s accepting some Cuban refugees presently seeking political asylum in the Peruvian Embassy in Havana?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

-I will seek information on this matter and let Senator Watson have it.

page 1438

ABORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION BILL

Senator KEEFFE:
QUEENSLAND

– My question is directed to the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and I think the question becomes relevant in view of his earlier admission on the land rights legislation. Can he inform the Parliament of the number of objections he has received from all sources to the Aboriginal Development Commission Bill 1979?

Senator CHANEY:
LP

-I cannot give firmly the number of suggestions and submissions that have been made except to say that I think 1 1 formal written submissions were made with respect to that Bill. As the honourable senator would be aware, several meetings were organised by a task force from my Department which were attended by many Aboriginal individuals representing many Aboriginal organisations. The most substantial suggestions which have been put forward came from the National Aboriginal Conference and the Council for Aboriginal Development, although substantial suggestion? were also made by other individuals and organisations. I would expect to be advising the Senate within the next week or so of the changes which the Government proposes to make to the Bill following those consultations.

I must say that I think making the Bill available for comment and seeing the extent to which the Aboriginal community has been interested in commenting on it has been a most valuable experience. I hope that the precedent we have established here is one which will be followed in future legislation which is brought down in relation to Aboriginal affairs.

page 1438

QUESTION

APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL CONSTABLES

Senator MISSEN:
VICTORIA

– My question is directed to the Attorney-General. I refer to the Police Act Amendment Bill 1980 recently passed by the Queensland Parliament, a copy of which I have drawn to the attention of the Attorney-General. Is the Minister aware that under clause 4 of that Bill, the Queensland Government may appoint persons employed by the Commonwealth as special constables and that they will have the power to exercise the full rights of ordinary police officers? Is the Minister also aware that under section 69C of the amending legislation, information may be disclosed to Commonwealth Government departments that may well either violate the privacy of individuals whose personal details are included in police files, or be libellous in its content? Is it correct that the Queensland Bar Association, the Queensland Law Society and civil liberties bodies have strongly criticised the legislation? Will the Minister comment on these provisions and, in particular, the implications which they have for the rights and civil liberties of citizens living in Queensland? Will the Attorney-General assure the Senate that Commonwealth employees will not be permitted to exercise such powers that could defeat the privacy and liberty of the individual citizen?

Senator DURACK:
LP

- Senator Missen has drawn my attention only recently to the Police Act Amendment Bill passed recently by the Queensland Parliament. The particular clauses to which Senator Missen refers are those dealing with the appointment of Commonwealth officers as special constables and the disclosure of information to Commonwealth departments under another clause of the Bill. I have not had the opportunity to consider in any depth the matters to which Senator Missen refers. The appointment of Commonwealth officers as special constables under State legislation is by no means novel. It has been done in New South Wales. The point about which Senator Missen is concerned is the nature of the powers that special constables would have under this legislation. I appreciate that that is the real concern as is also the question of disclosure of material to Commonwealth Government departments. The matters that the honourable senator raises are serious ones. They need to be given a good deal more attention than I have been able to give them since he drew them to my attention. I will certainly undertake to do this as soon as possible.

I understand that although the Bill has been passed by the Queensland Parliament, it has not yet come into force. I am aware that there have been many criticisms of the Bill, but I think there is still time to give consideration to these matters.

page 1438

QUESTION

EXPORT OF LIVE SHEEP

Senator PRIMMER:
VICTORIA

– I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industry whether it is a fact that in 1 979 over 5 million live sheep were exported from Australia largely for slaughter in the Middle East. Is it also a fact that almost 400 meat workers have been sacked from the meatworks of Thomas Borthwick and Sons (Australasia) Ltd in Portland, Victoria over the last four weeks, including 40 yesterday? Did ships carrying 132,000 live sheep leave the port of Portland in recent days destined for Iran? Has the management of the Borthwick company at Portland given as the reason for the sacking of workers the shortage of sheep for killing? What is the Government prepared to do in order to create a balance between job opportunities in Australian abattoirs and the export of live sheep from our shores?

Senator SCOTT:
Minister Assisting the Minister for Trade and Resources · NEW SOUTH WALES · NCP/NP

– The honourable senator seeks detail in a question in several parts and I shall seek to get it for him. The Government is most concerned that the slaughter industry in Australia should be maintained and expanded. It constantly keeps this matter before it in consideration of live sheep exports. There has been an undertaking to achieve a certain balance between live sheep exports and the slaughtering of sheep in Australia. That is the Government’s view and its objective. I shall refer the question to the appropriate Minister and supply him with an answer.

page 1439

QUESTION

OVER-PAYMENT TO CHEMISTS

Senator TOWNLEY:
TASMANIA

-Can the Minister representing the Minister for Health briefly explain to the Senate how the Government managed to overpay chemists some hundreds of millions of dollars over the past years?

Senator McLaren:

– How much?

Senator TOWNLEY:

-Just wait. I will get to you in a minute. Is the Minister aware that some chemists, including myself, are more than willing to repay any money that can be shown to have been overpaid? Will the Minister ask the Minister for Health to investigate the possibility of retrieving all the overpaid money?

Senator Dame MARGARET GUILFOYLESenator Townley will be aware that the Minister for Health made a statement with regard to this matter a week or two ago. In that statement he referred to the circumstances whereby the arrangements with chemists had been subject to an error in the computation of the original amount agreed, I think in 1974, and he referred to other matters that had occurred with regard to increases made on that inaccurate base. I have nothing to add to the statement, as to how the overpayment occurred, made by the Minister for Health. But I shall refer to him the matter of an investigation regarding retrieval of funds that has been raised by Senator Townley. I think I should say, however, that the payments that were made were legally made and I do not know that all pharmacists would share the attitude of

Senator Townley inasmuch as he claims he would be willing to refund any overpayments that have been made to him. I think that most pharmacists would argue that they were indeed not overpayments, that whilst there may have been some error in the calculation of the agreed amount, it could not be termed an overpayment in the sense that it is recoverable.

Senator Cavanagh:

– I raise a point of order. Does Senator Townley, in asking for an inquiry into this matter of overpayment to pharmacists, refer to a matter in which he has a pecuniary interest? Is it correct that the Minister should now proceed to seek an inquiry in relation to Senator Townley ‘s possible debt to the Government while he remains a member of the Senate?

The PRESIDENT:

-Order! There is no point of order.

page 1439

QUESTION

OVERPAYMENT TO CHEMISTS

Senator GRIMES:
NEW SOUTH WALES

– My question, which is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Health, follows the question asked by Senator Townley. Is it not a fact that in the case of social security recipients, where overpayments are made by government mistake, recovery of those payments is also made, if necessary taking people to the courts to obtain those recoveries? Can the Minister explain to us what the difference is between the case of the chemists who were overpaid some $253m by government mistake and the case of age and invalid pensioners and unemployment beneficiaries who also sometimes receive overpayments through government mistake and yet are pursued to the courts?

Senator Dame MARGARET GUILFOYLE:

-I do not want to go into detail on a matter that is the province of my colleague the Minister for Health, as I referred to his earlier statement on this matter. However, I did say on his behalf that the amounts which can be termed overpayments by some with regard to pharmacists are not amounts that are legally recoverable. It is not a matter that is able to be pursued because it was the subject of an agreement or an arrangement between the Government and chemists. We could pursue the matter that the agreement was inaccurately based because of the error that occurred in 1974 in the compilation of the base on which those payments were made.

The overpayments which are made in the course of social security payments under the Act and for which legal entitlement can be determined are a different matter. As Senator Grimes would be aware, in some cases where overpayments have occurred as a result of departmental error, recovery is not pursued. I think that Senator Grimes has been successful in pursuing some of those matters on behalf of constituents. I think I should refer the Senate again to the statement of the Minister for Health, which sets out in sequence the events which led to the discussion on the payments made to pharmacies. I restate that anything that could be regarded by some as an overpayment during the years since 1974 is not legally recoverable.

page 1440

QUESTION

RIVER MURRAY WATERS AGREEMENT

Senator DAVIDSON:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA

– I direct my question to the Minister for National Development and Energy. I seek information on amendments to the River Murray Waters Agreement which are designed to give greater control of water quality to the River Murray Commission. Is it a fact that the Minister has advised the South Australian Minister of Water Resources, Mr Arnold, that the draft amendments will be ready soon for distribution to the appropriate States for study and comment? Has the Minister any information on the progress of this distribution? Will he indicate when he expects some response to this study which will lead to a strengthening of the River Murray Commission?

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– The Government regards the whole of the River Murray management as a matter of great significance. It has recently received the Maunsell report into salinity. Progress on the legislation is being made. My officers and I have been in touch with the relevant States. I am not sure as to the immediacy aspect. I will find out and let the honourable senator know.

page 1440

QUESTION

WITHDRAWAL OF MONEY FROM PENSIONERS’ BANK ACCOUNTS

Senator MELZER:

– My question is addressed to the Minister for Social Security. During the proceedings in the Senate on Wednesday, 2 April, I raised some matters of concern in the area of social security. One of those matters concerned the practice of her Department in withdrawing money from pensioners’ bank accounts because of overpayments. This has led to an amount in excess of the overpayment being withdrawn. The other matter concerned occasions when officers of the Department have, without the knowledge of pensioners, broken into safety deposit boxes, inspected the contents and left the boxes broken and open. Will the Minister comment on the legality of these practices? Does the Minister approve of them? Will they continue? Will compensation be paid to the people involved?

Senator Dame MARGARET GUILFOYLE:

My attention was drawn to the remarks made by Senator Melzer on 2 April. I asked the Victorian office of my Department to get from Senator Melzer ‘s office details of the pensioners who were aggrieved in the way she mentioned. I understand that my Department is still waiting for that information so that we may ascertain whether there is some explanation for what has been related to Senator Melzer. It is not the practice of my Department to follow the procedures outlined by Senator Melzer. There is no authority under the Social Services Act for any officer of my Department to break open a safety deposit box. I would be surprised if any bank manager would permit an officer of my Department to have access which would enable the officer to open a safety deposit box. I have asked for the details to see whether we can determine what occurred in this instance.

With regard to the matter raised concerning withdrawals from bank accounts, I think that in order to make this matter fully clear I ought to have leave to incorporate in Hansard the relevant instructions from the Department’s manual and also to draw attention to the amendment to the Social Services Act that was introduced in 1 974 by the then Minister for Social Security, Mr Hayden. That was an amendment to the Act which enabled payments to be made into a person’s bank account and also enabled payments to be withdrawn from a person’s bank account. The authority to recover an overpayment from a credit balance in a bank account was inserted in 1974. This method generally arises when payments have been credited to an account following the death of a pensioner, for instance. It would be unusual for those provisions to be used to recover overpayments arising from other causes.

Whilst the Social Services Act does provide authority for the recovery of pension overpayments from bank accounts, this method is used only when alternative means of recoveryfor example, cash refunds or withholding money from future benefits or pensions- are not available, or when such means would cause distress or inconvenience to the pensioner concerned. Recovery from savings bank accounts is not sought in any case when credits already have been entered into the pass book. Mr President, I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard the relevant section of the Social Services Act and an extract from the manual of the Department of Social Security, which clearly show that the procedure outlined by Senator Melzer was a departure from the administrative practices of the Department.

Leave granted.

The documents read as follows- 135w. ( 1) A pension may. at the request of the pensioner and with the consent of the Director-General, be paid to the credit of an account maintained by the pensioner, either alone or jointly with another person, with a bank, credit union or building society

  1. Payments under this section to the credit of an account shall be made at such intervals as the Director-General determines.

  2. Where the amount of a payment under this section to the credit of an account exceeds the amount payable to the pensioner, the Director-General may within 3 years after the date of the payment, serve on the bank, credit union or building society with which the account is maintained a notice in writing requiring the bank, credit union or building society to pay to Australia, out of that account-

    1. the amount specified in the notice, being an amount that is not greater than the amount of that excess or so much of the amount of that excess as has not been repaid to, or recovered by, Australia; or
    2. the amount of the balance standing to the credit of the account at the time of the service of the notice on the bank, credit union or building society, whichever is the lesser amount.
  3. A bank, credit union or building society shall comply with a notice served on it under su b-section ( 3 ).

Penalty: $100.

  1. 5 ) Where the Director-General serves a notice under subsection (3.) he shall serve a copy of the notice, either personally or by post, on the pensioner to whom the notice relates.
  2. A bank, credit union or building society that makes a payment to Australia in compliance with a notice from the Director-General that is expressed to be given under subsection (3) shall be deemed to have made that payment under the authority of, and on behalf of, the pensioner to whom the notice relates.
  3. In this section, unless the contrary intention appears- account’, in relation to a credit union or building society, means an account maintained by a person with the credit union or building society to which are credited moneys received on deposit by the credit union or building society from that person; building society’ means an organization registered as a permanent building society under a law of a State or Territory; credit union’ means an organization registered as a credit union under a law of a State or Territory; pension’ means a pension or other benefit under this Act that is payable in instalments, but does not include a benefit under Pan VII; pensioner’ means a person entitled to receive payment of a pension, whether on his own behalf or on behalf of another person.

EXAMINERS MANUAL

PAYMENT OF PENSIONS

SECTION 33

  1. 1 Methods of payment-( Pensions Manual- 15. 17). 33.2 Recall provisions:

    1. Section 135w (3) of the Social Services Act provides that, where an amount of pension credited to a bank account, credit union savings account or permanent building society savings account maintained by a pensioner on his own account or jointly with another person exceeds his entitlement, the Director-General may, within 3 years after the date payment is credited to the account, serve a notice in writing on the bank, credit union or permanent building society requesting refund of the excess payment or the amount of the balance standing to the credit of the account at the time the request for refund is made, whichever is the less.
    2. A notice in writing for the purposes of section 135w (5) will be a standard form (S.A. 1 15). A copy of the form will also be served on the pensioner together with a letter explaining the reasons for the excess payment and the method of recovery. A separate form (S.A. 1 16) should be used for recall of pension before the due date.
    3. Delegation under section 135w(3) to serve notices on banks, credit unions and permanent building societies requiring them to repay excess amounts of pension have been given to the following positions;
    1. 1 ) Assistant Directors (Pensions);
    2. Senior Assistant Director (Benefits) Hobart;
    3. Assistant Directors (Operations);
    4. Senior Assistant Director (Management) Hobart;
    5. 5 ) Special Pensions Officer; and
    6. Determining Officers (Pensions).

BENEFITS BRANCH INSTRUCTION 1976-44

PENSIONS SECTION

Payment of Pensions to Accounts

In Benefits Branch Instruction 1976-7 paragraphs 10 and 1 1 you were advised that the provisions of Section 135w (3) to recover excess pension payments from Banks should not be implemented until further information became available.

  1. A memorandum dated 1 April 1976 has now been received from the Director-General and is circulated for the information of officers concerned:

Following discussions with the Attorney-General, a letter was sent to the Reserve Bank which has undertaken to inform the Australian Bankers’ Association and other banks of the position.

In conformity with the advice to the banks, recall notices issued under Section 135w(3) should be strictly confined to overpayment cases, of which an important category will be payments credited following the death of a pensioner. Notices should be issued only in such cases where alternate means of recovery (e.g. cash refunds: withholding from future benefit) are not available, or where such means would cause distress or inconvenience to the pensioner.

An undertaking has been given to the banks that Section 135w notices will not issue when the credit/s has/have been entered into a savings passbook. Therefore, before recall notices are issued in cases where a payment has been forwarded for credit to a savings account, the particular bank branch should be contacted to ascertain whether or not the credit has been entered into the passbook.

No action can be taken to recall from a bank any overpayments from a period before a particular pensioner began having his/her pension credited to an account with that bank.’

  1. Subject to the restrictions placed on the use of the provision by the Director-General as above, the procedure contained in Section 9 of the guideline Notes and Interim Procedure issued on 21 January 1976 should now be implemented.
Senator Dame MARGARET GUILFOYLE:

-I would welcome from Senator Melzer further details, which have been sought through my Victorian office, to enable us to see what did occur and to take any appropriate action required. I would expect that every officer of my Department would comply with the administration of the Act as it is set out, and with the departmental manual instructions.

Senator MELZER:

– I wish to ask a supplementary question, Mr President. The Minister did not answer the section of my question which dealt with more than the amount of overpayment being withdrawn. Does the Minister know whether that happens often? What sort of attitude does the Department take towards more than the amount of overpayment being withdrawn from a pensioner’s account?

Senator Dame MARGARET GUILFOYLE:

-As I have already stated, the procedure outlined by Senator Melzer was clearly contrary to the administration of the Act. That is why 1 would like to see the details we have sought from her office to determine what did occur and to determine whether there is an explanation for it. As I said, the procedure was a departure from the administrative practice and was against the manual instructions. I seek Senator Melzer’s cooperation in order to determine whether any officer of my Department has a misunderstanding or whether there is another explanation of the matters which were related to her.

page 1442

QUESTION

DARWIN AIRPORT

Senator KILGARIFF:
NORTHERN TERRITORY

– I direct a question to the Minister representing the Minister for Transport, although perhaps it could be directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence. Is the Minister in a position to indicate what is the present stage of development of a new terminal building for the Darwin Airport? When is it planned to take the matter to a public hearing and what is the probable planned date for the commencement and completion of the project? Having in mind the expressed wish of the people of the northern suburbs of Darwin who live north of McMillans Road that they be not exposed unduly to aircraft noise, will the Federal Government inquire into the matter or accept a proposal to build the terminal on the Winnellie side of the airport which would facilitate the servicing of the proposed new terminal and would give vehicular traffic access to the

Stuart Highway and thence direct to the city of Darwin?

Senator CHANEY:
LP

-Senator Kilgariff has raised in the Senate before questions relating to the Darwin Airport. I think most honourable senators would be familiar with the evident inadequacies of that airport as far as civilian traffic is concerned. I think many honourable senators would be aware also that the matter of improving the airport is complicated by the fact that it is both a civil and a military airport. It was in the latter half of last year that the Department of Defence, following a review of defence planning, decided that the area which currently is used for civil aviation would be required for defence needs by 1985. Consequent upon that decision, the Department of Transport is now actively planning for the relocation of the civil terminal. It is a fairly large project. As suggested in the question asked by the honourable senator, there will have to be detailed investigation into alternative schemes before the final plans can be submitted to government.

It is expected that the work will continue throughout the remainder of this year, leading to a firm proposal to government in the first half of 198 1. Discussion of the project is continuing with the appropriate departments of the Territory. When preliminary proposals are formulated they will be open for public scrutiny and comment. The final proposal will be subject to the requirements of the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974. The Government will refer the proposal to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works for public examination. Although the details cannot be fully known at this stage, as I indicated previously, it is expected that the program will be complete by 1985.

The honourable senator also raised the question of building the terminal on the Winnellie side of the airport. The Department of Defence plans to develop the whole of the area to the south of the main runway. Therefore, it is not available for civil aviation development. A civil terminal on the Winnellie side would simply increase the existing difficulty where the military use is split. It would cause problems of control and security. For those reasons and also for safety reasons, civil aircraft operations and public areas will not be located adjacent to aprons where military aircraft are operating. My advice from the Department is that aircraft noise effects are being given very careful consideration in the review of possible sites. There is a problem of aircraft landing and taking off rather than of aircraft using taxiways. But the selection of a site and the design of facilities will be such as to minimise the noise impact consistent with other constraints.

page 1443

QUESTION

ETHNIC BROADCASTING

Senator RYAN:
ACT

– My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications. It concerns the broadcast of ethnic television programs. Now that the second series of ethnic television programs is underway and is being broadcast on Sunday mornings in Sydney and Melbourne, why has the Minister persisted in his refusal to allow these programs to be broadcast in the Australian Capital Territory where over 20 per cent of the community is of ethnic origin? Will the Minister specifically give reasons for his refusal of the offer by the television station CTC 7 in Canberra to broadcast these programs locally free of charge to the Government?

Senator CHANEY:
LP

– I am aware that ethnic television programs have recommenced and that they are being broadcast at this stage only in Sydney and Melbourne. That was announced a considerable time ago. I was not familiar with the fact that CTC 7 had made the offer referred to by the honourable senator. I will have to take up the question with Mr Staley, the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, and seek a reply for her.

page 1443

QUESTION

COMPUTER SECURITY

Senator NEAL:
VICTORIA

– I direct a question to the Attorney-General. I refer specifically to the problem areas raised by computer science. The apparent massive invasion of personal privacy associated with trafficking in computer produced lists of private citizens is a case in point. Unknown to the individuals concerned, their intimate private, financial and health details may be bought and sold for commercial advantage. I believe that Mr Justice Kirby and the Law Reform Commission have made a number of recommendations to Government in the privacy areas where protecting legislation to safeguard the rights of the individual is now overdue. Can the Minister say what these special areas are? Can he indicate the progress the Government has made to date with the planned introduction of such necessary protective legislation? When is it expected that the Parliament will see the legislation?

Senator DURACK:
LP

-The Law Reform Commission was given a reference in April 1 976 to inquire into and report upon the extent to which undue intrusions into and interference with privacy arise or are capable of arising under laws of the Commonwealth Parliament or the Territories. The Law Reform Commission in its report entitled ‘Unfair publication: Defamation and privacy’ dealt with some aspects of privacy but not with the general aspects to which Senator Neal has referred. It also dealt with some privacy aspects in its report entitled ‘Privacy and the Census’ which was tabled in the Senate on 15 November 1 979. However, its major work on the subject has not yet been completed. No report has been made to the Government but it is understood that the report may be available later this year. I think that the concern raised in Senator Neal’s question has not yet arisen. There is no report in relation to the general matters raised by him.

As to the reports that the Government has received which deal in some respect with privacy, I have raised with the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General the question of the report of the Law Reform Commission, ‘Unfair Publication: Defamation and Privacy’. The Standing Committee of Attorneys-General currently is looking at the question of defamation law reform in Australia, taking into account the recommendations of that report. The Government also has given consideration to the report on privacy and the census, and decisions were announced by the Treasurer in relation to the coming census in regard to some of the recommendations in that report. The Government is still giving consideration to the balance of the recommendations.

page 1443

QUESTION

TPI HOSTEL, HOBART

Senator WRIEDT:

– My question is directed to the Minister for Social Security. I refer to the imminent closure in Hobart of the hostel for totally and permanently incapacitated persons. The Minister will recall that I and other members of this Parliament have discussed with her the financial difficulties of that hostel over the last year or two. I ask her whether it is the Government’s intention to allow the hostel to be closed through lack of financial support. If that is to be the case, will the Government make any offer to the hostel for relocation of those persons resident at it?

Senator Dame MARGARET GUILFOYLEI do recall Senator Wriedt’s interest in this matter and our discussions with regard to it. That was quite some time ago. This hostel was approved in 1966 and since 1976 it has reported difficulties in financial arrangements for its operation. I understand that it has had deficits since that time. Officers of the departments of Social Security, Veterans’ Affairs and Health, the TPI Association Hostel and the Tasmanian Health

Department have done all that they could to assist the association to make the hostel a viable undertaking. The’ association has now officially advised that it will close the hostel at the end of April. It has undertaken to continue to care for any residents not satisfactorily placed by the end of April until alternative arrangements can be made.

My Department has been very conscious of the needs of the residents of the hostel and has maintained very close liaison to ensure that they will not be seriously disadvantaged by its impending closure. Indeed, two officers of my Department have been seconded specifically for the purpose of making alternative arrangements wherever possible. I can assure Senator Wriedt and other honourable senators that all residents will be helped to find suitable alternative care and, as I said, the association has said that it will do all that it can to look after the people until alternative arrangements can be made. It is a difficult position and there is to be a discussion between the association and my Department, I think in the next week or two, as to what will occur after the closure of the hostel.

It is of some concern to us, notwithstanding the fact that it is to be closed, that some four residents recently have been admitted. This is something that needs to be discussed as well, if new admissions are to be made. At this stage I can only assure the Senate that my Department is closely watching the situation. It has two officers very strongly involved and there is the assistance that needs to be given to find alternative accommodation. I believe that the organisation will cooperate until those satisfactory arrangements can be made.

page 1444

QUESTION

PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY

Senator KNIGHT:
ACT

-Mr President, I direct my question, which affects the interests of members of the Parliament, to you. In doing so I fully acknowledge the statement that you made this afternoon. I refer to allegations that have been made in connection with the transfer of Mr Dunn and his subsequent reinstatement in the Parliamentary Library, particularly as some statements have been made and concern has been expressed by members of the Parliamentary Library Committee and also because some statements have referred to alleged unwarranted limitations on the normal research activities of Parliamentary Library staff and thus1 their capacity to serve the needs of senators and members, and affecting the rights of Parliamentary Library staff to express opinions on certain issues. Therefore I ask, Mr President, whether you, with your co-chairman of the Parliamentary Library Committee, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, will convene a meeting of that Committee, in the next few days if possible, to discuss these issues.

The PRESIDENT:

– I have had a number of requests for an early meeting of the Committee and this morning I made inquiries regarding a convenient time for such a meeting. I will be discussing the matter with Mr Speaker. I acknowledge that I have received from honourable senators, members of the Committee, and others, requests for an early meeting of the Committee.

page 1444

QUESTION

PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY

Senator EVANS:
VICTORIA

– My question is also addressed to you, Mr President, in your capacity as one of the persons, along with Mr Speaker, who are jointly responsible to this Parliament for the administration of the Library. With reference to the material that was tabled earlier today, I ask what were the policy impediments to Mr Dunn being granted leave without pay while occupying his present position as distinct from being transferred to the specially created new position? Was Mr Dunn told by Mr Weir that in his new position he would not be permitted to write on East Timor? Was Mr Dunn told by Mr Weir that in his new position he would no longer have access to communications, even routine unclassified material, from the Foreign Affairs Department? Were the research responsibilities proposed for Mr Dunn in his new position such that he would no longer have contact with members of Parliament? Was Mr Dunn to be prohibited in his new job from undertaking any duties except with the concurrence of the senior research director? If the answer to any of those questions is yes, how was it possible for you to say, Mr President, as you did in your statement, that Mr Dunn was to be transferred to a position of equal level and status, and with the same subject specialities as his present job? Also, how was it possible for you to say that there were no politicial implications underlying that transfer?

The PRESIDENT:

– The honourable senator has asked a series of questions. I shall obtain information in respect of the matter and give the honourable senator answers to the questions he has raised.

Senator EVANS:

– I wish to ask a supplementary question. Given that there seems to be some prospect that this matter will be debated either later today or tomorrow, is it possible for answers to those questions to be obtained before the debate is brought on?

The PRESIDENT:

– I shall obtain specific answers to the honourable senator’s questions as quickly as I can. In respect of one aspect of the questions, the issue of leave without pay for extended periods at the present time presents major difficulties to any department. It raises the question of staff numbers and so on, and is a difficult matter to get around. I should like to look at the other questions more closely, and I will give the honourable senator an answer as soon as I can.

page 1445

QUESTION

CUBAN REFUGEES

Senator CARRICK:
LP

– Earlier today I was asked a question about Cuban refugees in the Peruvian Embassy. It has been indicated to me that the Department of Foreign Affairs is monitoring the situation of the Cubans who sought refuge in the Peruvian Embassy in Havana. Although estimates vary, the Peruvian Governments has said that 10,800 Cubans are seeking entry to Peru. The Peruvian Government has consulted its Andean Pact partners about the situation. It is understood that some of these partners in Spain and the United States have offered to assist in resettling the people concerned. The Government has received an approach from the Peruvian Foreign Minister, Mr Arturo Garcia, asking that Australia also resettle some of these people. The Peruvian Charge has also made representations to the Department of Foreign Affairs. In addition, the Intergovernmental Committee on European Migration, on which Australia has observer status, has made a similar request and has sought financial assistance for this purpose. The Government is conscious of the urgent humanitarian situation that exists. The Department of Foreign Affairs, together with the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, is examining these requests with a view to determining a response as quickly as possible.

page 1445

QUESTION

CANBERRA TELEPHONE DIRECTORY

Senator CHANEY:
LP

-On 19 March 1980 Senator Townley asked me, as Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, a question about the omission of a map of Tasmania from the map of Australia in the National Yellow Pages Service. I gave an answer at the time, but I sought further advice from the Minister. Telecom has now advised the Minister that the omission of Tasmania from the map was entirely inadvertent and apologises for the error. The Commission will ensure that Tasmania is included should the map be used in future advertisements.

page 1445

QUESTION

RADIO LICENCE FEES

Senator CHANEY:
LP

-On 2 April, Senator Thomas asked me, as Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, a question concerning the availability of the results of the current review of radiocommunications licences. The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has received a large number of representations on this matter and is very much aware of the concern expressed by many of the organisations to which Senator Thomas referred. The Minister has in fact had meetings on this matter with several associations. Because of the obvious concern in the community on this matter the Minister asked his Department to finalise urgently the review which was being undertaken into the restructuring of radiocommunications licence fees. It is proposed to offer significant relief to many organisations in this area and a submission for the Government’s consideration is presently being finalised. The matter is being handled expeditiously and an announcement will be made as soon as decisions are made.

page 1445

QUESTION

TELEGRAPH SERVICES IN TASMANIA

Senator CHANEY:
LP

-On 2 April, Senator Townley asked me, as Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, a question seeking clarification of a reported recommendation by Telecom Australia to restrict the operational hours of the Hobart chief telegraph office. I have a response from the Minister and I seek leave to incorporate it in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The answer read as follows-

Telecom Australia advises that no decision has been taken in regard to the hours of service at Hobart or any other chief telegraph office.

An internal working group has been reviewing the effectiveness of the after hours arrangements at telegraph offices in the light of the traffic offering during those hours. This group has submitted a report which has not yet been analysed by Headquarters Management. Currently the matter is being studied by Telecom. The Report has also been sent to the staff associations concerned for their examination.

Telecom Australia is keenly aware of its statutory obligation to meet the needs of the people of Australia. The Honourable Senator may be assured that if any changes are made, the new arrangements will be designed to meet the reasonable needs of the public telegraph user consistent with the dual obligation to operate the service as efficiently and economically as practicable.

page 1445

NATIONAL WATER RESOURCES

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesMinister for National Development and Energy · LP

– Pursuant to section 6 of the National Water Resources (Financial Assistance) Act 1978 I present copies of an agreement with

Queensland and associated documents in respect of projects in conjunction with the development and management of water resources.

Senator McLAREN:
South Australia

-by leave- I move:

I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later stage.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 1446

PARTICULARS OF PROPOSED ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURE

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesLeader of the Government in the Senate · LP

– I lay on the table explanatory notes of the AttorneyGeneral’s Department and the departments of Employment and Youth Affairs, Home Affairs and Primary Industry, relating to the estimates of proposed additional expenditure for 1979-80, together with supplementary and revised explanatory notes from departments whose explanatory notes were tabled on 2 April 1980.

page 1446

AUSTRALIAN CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION COMMISSION

Senator CHANEY:
Western AustraliaMinister for Aboriginal Affairs · LP

– On behalf of the Attorney-General (Senator Durack), I present the annual report of the President of the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission 1979.

page 1446

AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS COMMISSION

Senator CHANEY:
Western AustraliaMinister for Aboriginal Affairs · LP

– I present the financial statement of the Australian National Railways Commission 1 978-79.

Senator McLAREN:
South Australia

– by leave- I move:

I seek leave to continue my remarks at a later stage.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

page 1446

LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

Senator CARRICK:
New South WalesLeader of the Government in the Senate · LP

– by leave- As honourable senators are aware we are starting three weeks of sittings after which two sitting weeks will remain before the winter break. Today, on Thursday and on Monday next the Senate will adjourn during the day so that Estimates committees can meet. Consequently, there are tight constraints on the time available to complete the Government’s program. I have had prepared and am circulating for the information of all honourable senators the proposed program of legislation for these three weeks. I should mention also that some 30 Bills will remain for consideration during the last two weeks of the sittings.

Whilst the Government is confident that the program can be achieved, it is clear that orderly progress will be necessary week by week. If there are delays it may be necessary for the Senate to sit on the following additional days: Monday, 28 April, Friday, 16 May and also Friday, 23 May if business is not completed on the previous day. These additional days would provide the equivalent of an extra sitting week. I also propose that Government Business should take precedence over General Business on Thursday, 1 5 May and Thursday, 22 May. I now invite the goodwill and co-operation of all honourable senators in achieving the program in an orderly way so that we may all give due attention to matters of interest to honourable senators on both sides of the chamber.

page 1446

SENATE ESTIMATES COMMITTEES

Motion (by Senator Carrick) agreed to:

That the sitting of the Senate be suspended until 10.15 p.m. or such earlier time as the President takes the Chair to enable Estimates committees A, B and C to meet.

The PRESIDENT:

– The sitting of the Senate is suspended until 10. 1 5 p.m. or such earlier time as I take the chair. Estimates Committee A will meet in the Senate Chamber. Estimates Committee B will meet in Senate Committee Room No. 1 and Estimates Committee C will meet in Senate Committee Room No. 6. The bells will be rung for two minutes prior to the meeting of the Committees.

Sitting suspended from 4.22 to 10.15 p.m.

page 1446

ADJOURNMENT

Darwin Airport- Distinguished Visitors- Postal Services: Queensland

Motion (by Senator Carrick) proposed:

That the Senate do now adjourn.

Senator KILGARIFF:
Northern Territory

– I wish to speak very briefly tonight ona matter which I raised in a question I asked this afternoon in the Senate relating to the Darwin Airport. When one speaks about airports in the

Northern Territory and air schedules one could go further and discuss the two-airline agreement and the scheduling of aircraft which creates overcrowding of air terminals, particularly in Alice Springs and Darwin. One could discuss also the way in which aircraft are re-scheduled at night, particularly on long weekends, to the discomfort of the people of the Northern Territory. However, discussion of those aspects must wait until later in the week. This afternoon I asked Senator Chaney, as Minister representing the Minister for Transport, a question regarding the proposed Darwin Airport terminal because of leaflets which are being put in mail boxes on the northern side of McMillans Road- in the northern suburbs of Darwin. Those leaflets have caused considerable concern among the people living in that area. I suggest that prior to those leaflets being placed in the mail boxes little concern was felt about this matter because people believed, as they should believe, that they would be given a fair go, that they would be consulted and would be allowed to express their views.

However, the placing of those leaflets in mail boxes has caused very great concern because they charge the Government with having done nothing other than to break promises and to do certain things which will bring about the construction of a new airport terminal in Darwin which will not be beneficial to the people but will create an extreme noise nuisance. The leaflet makes the following charges:

Noise levels will be intolerable- there will be no night curfew as applies in Sydney and Brisbane -

That bit about night curfews is true- and with more tourist flights expected in future the noise from planes landing, taxiing and taking off will increase dramatically.

There will be greatly increased traffic on roads near the new Terminal and again this will add to the noise level.

The noise will affect people’s lifestyles, the area will become a less desirable place in which to live, and property values will drop considerably.

So it goes on. In fairness to the people of the northern suburbs of Darwin, this afternoon I asked Senator Chaney, as Minister representing the Minister for Transport, what the situation was with regard to the proposed new Darwin Airport terminal, which is much needed. The old terminal was constructed prior to the Second World War. It was damaged during that War and it was damaged by Cyclone Tracy. All in all, it is a most unfit place to act as the front door to Australia for passengers arriving by air from overseas. I asked the Minister what the situation was with regard to the proposed new terminal, what stage the planning had reached and whether it was intended to take those plans to a public hearing. The Minister indicated in his reply that discussion on the project was continuing with the appropriate departments of the Territory, bearing in mind that it was a Federal responsibility, involving the Department of Defence and the Department of Transport, not the Northern Territory Government. He indicated too that the final proposals will be subject to the requirements of the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974 and that the Government will refer proposals to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works for examination.

I suggest that the people of the northern suburbs of Darwin have three forms of protection which have not been outlined in the leaflet. First of all, the preliminary proposals will be open to public scrutiny. Secondly, the final proposals will be subject to the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act. Thirdly, the proposals will go before the Public Works Committee, which will review the plans for the proposed new terminal. I ask the Government to come out and reassure the people of the northern suburbs of Darwin that what they are being told is completely misleading. It is causing them concern when there should be no concern.

In closing, I add one point concerning the siting of the proposed new terminal. I suggest that the authorities concerned should look very closely at the situation. I see no reason for siting the proposed new terminal in alignment with McMillan’s Road on the northern suburbs side of Darwin. It would be well suited to siting further down the runway on the Winnellie side, the Stuart Highway side, of Darwin, where it would have access to the facilities of Stuart Highway, would be closer to the city of Darwin and servicing would be much more convenient.

The PRESIDENT:

– Order! Before I call Senator Colston, I have very great pleasure in drawing the attention of honourable senators to the presence in my Gallery of two former members of this place, Mr John Marriott and Mr George Branson. All honourable senators who were members of this place when these honourable gentlemen were members of it will recall with pleasure and great respect and admiration the services these gentlemen gave to this House.

Honourable senators:

– Hear, hear!

Senator COLSTON:
Queensland

-For about three or four weeks I have been investigating ways by which the tiny town of Hungerford in Queensland could retain a postal service. Hungerford is located on the

Queensland-New South Wales border. It is about 200 kilometres north-west of Bourke and about 1 90 kilometres south-west of Cunnamulla. I am well aware that my colleague, Senator O ‘Byrne, knows the district quite well because he worked in that area for many years. I wish to outline how the local residents feel about the possibility of losing their post office. I shall quote parts of a letter I received from a person at Hungerford, in which she stated:

Recently a meeting was held for the people to express their feelings on the possible closure of the post office.

It appears we did not really have a say as it was either:

. We could have 24 hours telephone service and no Post Office; or

We could continue in the present situation.

At the present it is a non-continuous exchange with hours of 9 a.m.-l p.m.; 2 p.m.-9 p.m. Monday to Friday; 9 a.m.-l p.m. Saturday; 9 a.m.-lO a.m. Sunday.

These were the two choices we were given even though one of the local people asked “Why couldn’t we have 24 hours telephone service and a Post Office?” The reply from the government representatives was that this was not possible and if a vote was taken, it would be an unanimous decision.

Towards the end of the letter the writer made the following plea to me:

I call upon you, sir, in your capacity as a parliamentary member and a representative of the people to protest about unfairness of our proposed situation. Even if Telecom does put in 24 hours telephone service, then there is no reason why we should lose the post office after 1 1 2 years. We have just taken one step forward and that is the connection of rural power. Why should we step back by losing our post office?

Although this may be a very small matter to some people, it is a large matter to the people of Hungerford. I made certain inquiries about it, and in a reply I received from an officer of the Australian Postal Commission it was stated:

Telecom Australia will be converting the telephone exchange to a remotely controlled electronic exchange this month and the Postmaster has tendered his resignation effective from 30 April 1980. The Post Office will then be closed and a community mail agent will be appointed to distribute mail to the community. The agent will also be licensed to sell stamps.

Whilst I appreciate local residents may feel a sense of loss when a facility to which they have been accustomed is removed, it is considered that the arrangements made at Hungerford should involve little inconvenience for residents.

There will be some inconvenience to residents. Apparently they will still be able to buy postage stamps from a person who is licensed to sell them. Apparently mail will be distributed through a community mail bag. But these people will not have banking facilities with the Commonwealth Savings Bank and they will not be able to obtain a money order if they wish to do so. A definite vacuum will be caused by the removal of the post office in Hungerford. I must say in fairness that a reason was given to me in the letter from Australia Post as to why the post office might be closed. Part of the letter stated:

Under the terms ofthe Postal Services Act 1975 Australia Post is required to price its services so as to recover all of its operating costs and at least half of its capital expenditure from revenue. Against this background Australia Post is continually reviewing its services and methods of operation to ensure that the facilities provided are adequate to meet the reasonable needs of the community and that the resources available are used to the best advantage. These reviews have resulted in the closure of post offices where little use was being made of the facilities and where satisfactory arrangements could be made for the distribution of mail.

Against the background of the possibility of Hungerford losing its post office, I came into Parliament House this week and was absolutely amazed when I went down to our own post office in Parliament House and found that it is now an agent for Lotto. For those who are not aware of what Lotto is- I imagine that some of my constituents in Queensland will not be- it is a type of lottery, or what we in Queensland call the Golden Casket. Where are our priorities? After 112 years Hungerford will lose its post office. After 53 years we in Parliament House, through our post office, will have an agency for Lotto.

Senator McLaren:

– How about chook raffles?

Senator COLSTON:

– As Senator McLaren so appropriately says, we will soon have chook raffles. I wonder whether the post office has to become an agency for Lotto to recover all or part of its operating costs and at least half of its capital expenditure from revenue, as I was told in the letter to which I have referred. Mr President, I do not know what you think of having a Lotto agency in Parliament House. You may or may not care to make some comment. However, I know what the people of Hungerford think. They will lose their post office. At Parliament House we have a post office which has become an agency for Lotto. The people of Hungerford must think that we are living in an Alice in Wonderland world.

Senator CHANEY:
Western AustraliaMinister for Aboriginal Affairs · LP

- Senator Kilgariff raised in the adjournment debate a matter he had raised in Question Time relating to the problems surrounding the Darwin airport and certain circulars which have apparently been put around in the vicinity of the Darwin airport. I suggest to Senator Kilgariff that he make available to the Minister for Transport (Mr Hunt), a copy of the circular so that additional information beyond that which I was able to provide at Question Time might be provided to him. The Minister may think it necessary to give some reply to the pamphlet after he has seen it. I note that Senator Kilgariff in his speech this evening isolated the protection the community already has against anything which might be to its detriment with respect to the development of the airport. His comments no doubt will ease the fears of his constituents.

I note the concern Senator Colston expressed on behalf of the citizens of Hungerford about the possible loss of their post office. As I keep repeating in this place on behalf of the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, following the reforms instituted by Senator Bishop, the Australian Postal Commission is an independent statutory authority and is not subject to direction on these matters. However, I am sure that the Minister would be prepared to ask the Postal Commission to examine the matters which have been raised by the honourable senator. I refer to the point made by Senator Colston with respect to the provision of an agency for Lotto in the Parliament House post office. That innovation was probably directed by the Postal Commission towards enabling it to provide a broader service throughout the remoter parts of Australia. I have little doubt that it is trying to reduce its costs and increase its income, thereby ensuring its ability to provide better services to areas of Australia which are extremely expensive to service in the traditional way.

The matter Senator Colston has raised is no doubt a matter of very great importance to the citizens of Hungerford. I have heard similar representations from citizens in other small and remote communities in Australia, and I can understand what brought the honourable senator to put the matter before the Senate. I will refer the matter to the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, who I am sure in turn will refer it to the Postal Commission. I thank both honourable senators for bringing before the Senate matters which are obviously of concern to their constituents.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

page 1449

PAPERS

The following papers were presented, pursuant to statute:

Commonwealth Banks Act- Appointment-R. C. Last.

Customs Act-Regulations- Statutory Rules 1980 Nos. 61,71,72, 76.

Defence Act- Determinations- 1 980-

No. 9- Diving Allowance.

No. 13- Confined Spaces Allowance.

No. 14- Hot Conditions Allowance.

No. 15- Trainee Leader’s Allowance.

Defence Act, Naval Defence Act and Air Force ActRegulationsStatutory Rules 1980 No. 73.

Lands Acquisition Act- Land, etc., acquired for Airport purposes, Brisbane, Queensland.

Overseas Telecommunications Act- RegulationStatutory Rules 1980 No. 74.

Public Service Act- Regulations-Statutory Rules 1980 No. 75.

Public Service (Arbitration) Act-Determinations by the Arbitrator accompanied by statements regarding possible inconsistency with the law-

No. 78- Australian Public Service Artisans’ Association.

No. 79- Australian Workers’ Union and others.*

No. 80- Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers).

No. 81 -Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia.

No. 82- Commonwealth Foremen’s Association of Australia (Australian Public Service).* ( *not accompanied by statement)

States Grants (Petroleum Products) Act- Amendment of the Schedules to the subsidy scheme in relation to the States of New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia, dated 31 March 1980.

Senate adjourned at 10.33 p.m.

page 1450

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

The following answers to questions were circulated:

Deduction of Union Dues from Public Service Salaries (Question No. 2320)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 22 November 1979:

When may I expect a reply to my question without notice of 20 September 1979 in relation to deduction of union dues from the salaries of members of the Australian Public Service Association.

Senator Durack:
LP

– The Minister for Industrial Relations has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

I refer Senator Colston to my personal reply to him of 23 January 1980. This reply was as follows:

I refer to a parliamentary question without notice asked by you and directed to me by Senator Durack on 20 September 1979 and your subsequent question on notice of 22 November 1979, concerning the Government’s decision to discontinue deducting union dues from the salaries of members of the Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers) APSA(FDO).

Firstly, may 1 apologise for the delay in responding to this question.

I confirm that the Government is not providing an automatic payroll deduction facility in respect of the union dues of Commonwealth Public Service Act employees who are members of the Association to which you referred.

As you are aware, an industrial campaign had been waged by APSA(FDO) and the Administrative and Clerical Officers ‘ Association which frustrated the process of Government and severely disrupted some departmental operations. A direction by the Deputy Public Service Arbitrator to lift bans was not complied with and the unions did not heed a Government warning that deductions would cease where unions engaged in disruptive industrial action of the type then being pursued by the two associations. In such circumstances the Government was left with no choice but to take firm action.

Approaches have since been made to Government by the Council of Australian Government Employment Organisations and the ACOA seeking restoration of the deduction facility.

Following consideration of those approaches, the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister in Public Service Matters wrote to CAGEO and ACOA on 18 October 1979 and informed those organisations that the Government had decided not to accede to those requests.

Finally I have written to the ACTU, CAGEO and CPA informing them of the Government’s preparedness to take similar action in response to future strikes or disruptive industrial action in Commonwealth Government employment.

Health Insurance Act: Assignment Forms (Question No. 2340)

Senator MacGibbon:
QUEENSLAND

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 23 November 1979:

  1. 1 ) How many Assignment Forms under s. 20 or s. 20a of the Health Insurance Act 1973 have been:

    1. distributed to medical practitioners throughout Australia; and
    2. returned by medical practitioners as claims for payment, since 1 July 1975.

  2. ) What is the cost of printing and distributing these forms.

Senator Dame Margaret Guilfoyle:
LP

– The Minister for Health has provided the following, answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. 1 ) (a) 262,3 1 9,200. (b) 83,632,8 12.

N.B. In conjunction with the implementation of Medibank on 1 July 1975, the Health Insurance Commission initially issued 89.3 million Assignment Forms to all doctors to ensure maximum level of participation in the bulk billing arrangements.

With the changes introduced on 1 October 1976 there was a need to issue new Assignment Forms to cater for the revised arrangements.

The 1 November 1978 changes also required a complete revision of Assignment Forms and this contributed to the total number of forms issued.

It is not possible to provide information on wastage due to obsolescence or on the level of stocks of forms presently held by medical, dental and optometrical users.

  1. $2,338,662.

Advertising by Australian Commission

Question No. 2371)

Senator Walsh:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister represent ing the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 20 February 1980:

  1. 1 ) Is the Minister aware of an organisation called the Australian Commission, based in Washington, which claims to provide paid transportation and money-back guarantees for persons seeking work in Australia.
  2. Does the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs have any official connection with this organisation.
  3. Does the Department monitor the advertising of the Australian Commission to ensure that it does not falsely describe the employment situation in Australia.
  4. Has the Department ever taken action to correct misleading information published by the Australian Commission regarding the availability of jobs, or anything else in Australia.
Senator Dame Margaret Guilfoyle:
LP

– The Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question.

  1. 1 ) I am aware of a number of organisations of the type described operating in the USA.
  2. No.
  3. and (4) For many years the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs has been concerned that prospective migrants are being asked to pay for information about immigration prospects and procedure that is available free from Australian offices and that may be misleading. Some counter-advertising has been undertaken when funds were available. The advertising Managers of some publications have been contacted in an attempt to discourage acceptance of the advertisements. But since the activities of these enterprises are not illegal, they will no doubt continue as long as there is interest in emigration to Australia.

Marginal Income Tax Rate (Question No. 2372)

Senator Walsh:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 20 February 1980:

When was the maximum marginal income tax rate last lower than the present 60 per cent.

Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The maximum marginal income tax rate has not been lower than the present 60 per cent since the Commonwealth Government assumed sole responsibility for imposing income tax in 1 942.

Export Market Development Grants Scheme: Applications by Travel and Tourism Industry (Question No. 2385)

Senator Chipp:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 20 February 1980:

  1. 1 ) How many applications for grants have been received from individuals, firms and organisations in the travel or tourism industry, under the Export Market Development Grants scheme since this scheme was extended to the travel and tourism industry in 1978.
  2. How many applications have been successful.
  3. On what grounds have applications been refused.
  4. What was the total sum granted to the travel and tourism industry under the scheme as at 19 February 1980.
Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Acting Minister for Trade and Resources has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s questions:

  1. 1 ) The Export Market Development Grants Amendment Act 1978 includes provisions whereby persons and specified bodies in the travel and tourism industry may receive grants on eligible expenditure incurred in promoting eligible tourist services to persons resident outside Australia. The first year for application for grants was the year 1978-79 (ended 30 June 1979) and the closing date for lodging applications with the Export Development Grants Board was 30 November 1979. The Board has reported that 87 claims for the 1 978-79 grant year were submitted for assessment.
  2. By 19 February 1980, the Board had finalised its assessment of 23 of these claims, 4 of which were determined as having no grant entitlement.
  3. The Act and its associated Regulations specify what constitute eligible expenditure and eligible tourist services. Assessed ‘nil’ grant entitlements usually arise where claimants fail to meet eligibility criteria of the legislation.
  4. The Export Development Grants Board has reported that by 19 February 1980 it had determined grants totalling $250,593 on the 23 claims finalised to that date.

Liquid Fluorocarbons (Question No. 2393)

Senator Baume:
NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Science and the Environment, upon notice, on 20 February 1980:

  1. 1 ) Are liquid fluorocarbons used as propellants for aerosols and as part of the heat exchange mechanism in such things as air conditioning units for homes and cars.

  2. ) What tonnage of fluorocarbons is used in Australia annually for:

    1. ) heat exchange units; and
    2. aerosol propellants.
  3. Does research indicate whether a greater load of fluorocarbon is released into the atmosphere from aerosol propellants or from heat exchange units.
  4. With specific regard to aerosol propellants, is it possible to say what proportion of the contribution to atmospheric fluorocarbon load is made by medical aerosols such as salbutamol, beclomethasone or other medical aerosols.
Senator Chaney:
LP

– The Minister for Science and the Environment has provided the following answers to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. 1 ) Fluorocarbons are used in the heat exchange mechanisms of air conditioning and refrigeration systems. In particular, the chlorofluoromethane chemical species referred to as F. 1 1 and F. 12, which are used extensively as propellants in aerosol sprays, are both also used in heat exchange mechanisms. F. 12 is used predominantly in mobile air conditioning systems and in residential refrigeration. F. 1 1 is used to a lesser extent than F. 12, primarily in some commercial air conditioning. Apart from use in such heat exchange systems, and as propellants in aerosol sprays, the most significant use of these chemicals is as blowing agents in the production of plastic foams. To a minor extent they are used for liquid fast freezing and in some chemical sterilisation procedures. Related chemicals are used as solvents for degreasing, cleaning and drying, and for solder flux removal. It is the chlorofluoromethane species, F. 1 1 and F. 12 in particular, which have been of concern as a possible cause of atmospheric ozone depletion.
  2. Australian market surveys indicate that during 1978 the consumption of F. II and F. 12 was approximately 8500 tonnes in aerosol sprays, 2500 tonnes in refrigeration and air conditioning units, 2000 tonnes for plastic foam production.
  3. 3 ) Available data indicates that during 1 977 the approximate relative distribution of F. 1 1 and F. 12 sales worldwide, was: aerosols 50%, refrigeration and air conditioning 25%, plastic foam 20%, other 5%.

Of the total cumulative release of the chlorofluoromethane species F. 1 1 and F. 12 up to 1978, about 80 percent was derived from use of aerosol sprays, 15 per cent from heat exchange units and 5 per cent from foam production.

  1. It is estimated that about 1 per cent of all aerosol units produced in Australia are used for medical or pharmaceutical products. A further 0.5 per cent of aerosol units sold contain veterinary products. The major uses in Australia for aerosols with a fluorocarbon base are in personal products such as perfumes, deodorants, and hair sprays, and for insect sprays.

Social Security Operations: Northern Territory (Question No. 2437)

Senator Grimes:

asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on Tuesday 26 February 1980:

Did the Department of Social Security undertake in 1978 a review of Social Security operations in the Northern Territory; if so:

what were its major findings;

what changes were made to the Department’s operations and procedures as a result of the review;

will the Minister release copies of this report on request; and

if not, and if the Minister has classified it as an internal working document’, for what reason can it not be made available publicly.

Senator Dame Margaret Guilfoyle:
LP

– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (a), (b), (c), (d) I am advised that:

The Northern Territory Regional Administration of the Department of Social Security supplemented its normal review activities by a more formal review of operations in the Northern Territory in 1978.

The review was an internal one and the Department considered the report an internal working document. Its recommendations, together with conclusions drawn from normal assessments of efficiency and effectiveness which are continuously made by departmental staff, have led to improvements in the delivery of services in the Northern Territory over the subsequent period. 2,4,5-Tand2,4-D (Question No. 2450)

Senator Kilgariff:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 26 February 1 980:

  1. 1 ) What research has been carried out on whether the chemicals 2,4,5- T and 2,4- D are health hazards and whether the usage of these chemicals can cause physical or mental birth defects.
  2. Is TCDD dioxin present in 2,4,5- T; if so, can the amount be harmful to humans.
  3. If Dioxin is applied under commercial agricultural formulation of 2,4,5- T in the order of five parts in a thousand, as in the chemical formulation agent orange used in Vietnam, can it be considered a health risk.
Senator Dame Margaret Guilfoyle:
LP

– The Minister for Health has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. 1 ) A vast amount of research has been carried out on the chemicals 2,4,5- T and 2,4- D. This has been done over many years and all available data has been reviewed by the National Health and Medical Research Council (N.H. & M.R.C.) on several occasions. The most recent intensive study by a specially convened Working Party was made in June 1979. It must be accepted that many substances have the potential for causing birth defects if improperly used during pregnancy. The investigations, however, which were done by the N.H. & M.R.C. showed that there was no evidence that either of the substances referred to, when used according to responsible agricultural practice, resulted in birth defects.
  2. The dioxin (Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin) TCDD is present in 2,4,5- T in minute amounts. State and Territory legislation in Australia stipulates an upper limit of 0. 1 parts per million (ppm) and checks have demonstrated that average levels are well below this limit. Such low levels are not considered to be a health hazard when 2,4,5- T is used according to accepted practice.
  3. Levels of TCDD in agent orange have been reported to have averaged around 2 ppm but sometimes to have approached possibly 50 ppm. I am unaware that levels as high as 5 parts per thousand (or 5000 ppm), as referred to in the question, have ever been previously suggested. Health effects associated with TCDD have been demonstrated in humans exposed to unusually high concentrations. This has occasionally been reported in the past when unacceptably high levels have occurred during various manufacturing processes, not exclusively related to 2,4,5- T production, or following industrial accidents. The health risk is determined not only by the concentration of dioxin and total quantity present in a formulation but also by the duration of exposure, and the mode of absorption. The range of dioxin concentrations in agent orange as manufactured appears to have been subject to marked variation and the subsequent methods of product dilution may also have varied. Consequently it is not possible to give a precise answer to the question. At the same time it must be stressed that the permitted level of dioxin in Australia of 0. 1 ppm allows for a very wide margin of safety.

Savings Bonds (Question No. 2463)

Senator Chipp:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 27 February 1980:

Will the Government consider the introduction of bonds adjusted to the Consumer Price Index, along the lines of the scheme existing in New Zealand, to protect the savings of the elderly, those on fixed incomes, and young home buyers, from inflation.

Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

As part of the Government’s on-going review of the range of Commonwealth securities on issue, consideration has been given to the introduction of index-linked securities. However, to date the Government has not considered their introduction to be appropriate.

Social Service Recipients: Prosecutions (Question No. 2488)

Senator Grimes:

asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 4 March 1 980:

  1. 1 ) Does the Minister see files or minutes on all Social Service recipients who are prosecuted for misrepresentation in relation to social security entitlements.
  2. Is the Minister required to approve such prosecutions: if not, does the Minister in practice approve or disapprove such applications, and in what proportion.
  3. Did the Minister approve the prosecution of Anthony Waters of Tamworth.
Senator Dame Margaret Guilfoyle:
LP

– The answer to the honourable senator’s question is as follows: (l),(2)and(3)No.

Social Security Leaflets Notifying Pension Increase (Question No. 2523)

Senator Grimes:

asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 6 March 1 980:

  1. 1 ) How soon after the date of a pension increase or other adjustment of Social Security do leaflets normally become available in Department of Social Security offices.
  2. On what date after the increases of 1 November 1979 were leaflets available in the offices.
Senator Dame Margaret Guilfoyle:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) It is the Departmental practice to aim to have its pension and benefit leaflets available at departmental offices at the times when pension and benefit increases become current.
  2. Delays were experienced with the range of leaflets for the November 1979 pension and benefit increases due to production difficulties. The various leaflets became available on the following dates: Sickness Benefit December 4, 1979; Supporting Parents Benefit December 10; Special Benefit December 11; Widows Pension December 14; Unemployment Benefit December 28; Invalid Pension January 17, 1980; Age Pension February 8. No delays are expected in respect of the leaflets due for release in May 1 980.

Unemployment Benefit (Question No. 2562)

Senator Grimes:

asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 18 March 1980:

  1. 1 ) Does the Department of Social Security keep records which would enable it to find out how many members of a family living at the same address receive unemployment benefits, and what are the family relationships of those people.
  2. Does the Department at this stage know how many families with an unemployed breadwinner and unemployed children receiving benefits, live at the same address.
Senator Dame Margaret Guilfoyle:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) The Department of Social Security is able to use its computer records to identify clients living at one address but this would not establish relationships. A manual check of individual claims could be a means of identifying some family relationships.
  2. No.

Tertiary Education in Tasmania

Senator Carrick:
LP

-On 20 February 1980 Hansard, page 90) Senator Watson asked me, as Minister representing the Minister for Education, a question in relation to the decision made by the Tasmanian Government that the Tasmanian College of Advanced Education would withdraw from Hobart. He asked whether such a move would prejudice the remaining Tasmanian College of Advanced Education at Newnham in Launceston.

The Minister for Education has supplied the following information for answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The Tasmanian Government’s statement on the proposed changes, which was released on 19 February, indicates that the movement of the College of Advanced Education out of Hobart is intended to enable it to concentrate its activities in the north and north-west of the State. The Tasmanian Minister for Education, Mr Holgate, has stated that:

These regions will benefit as a result of staff and administrators being able to concentrate all their efforts outside Hobart. Greater harmony will develop within the College with the elimination of tension previously generated by the rivalry between the Mount Nelson and Newnham campuses’.

The details of the new arrangements for post-secondary education in Tasmania are still being worked out by a committee appointed by the Tasmanian Minister for Education.

Attorney-General’s Department

Staff-Meetings with Lobbyists (Question No. 1193)

Senator Walsh:

asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 20 February 1 979:

  1. On what dates since 10 December 1977 has the Attorney-General or members of his personal staff met representatives from (a) Canberra Liaison Pty Ltd; (b) Cramb Tariff Services Pty Ltd; (c) Peter Cullen Pty Ltd; (d) Dunkley International Ltd; (e) Ronald C. Fisher Trade Consultants Pty Ltd; (f) Denis M. Gilmour and Associates Pty Ltd; (g) International Public Relations; (h) Macintosh, Parkes and Associates; (i) Eric Walsh Pty Ltd; and (j) Eric White Associates.
  2. What organisations was each firm representing on each occasion.
  3. What was the name of each person present on each occasion.
  4. Where did each meeting take place and what was its duration.
Senator Durack:
LP

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

  1. 1) to (4) No special arrangements are made to record approaches by professional agencies and, as such agencies are not accorded any special treatment, there is no reason why there should be such special arrangements.

Statistics Relating to the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan (Question No. 2194)

Senator Rae:
TASMANIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 14 November 1979:

  1. I ) Do statistics available to the Government confirm the following figures relating to Taiwan and the People’s Republic of China:

    1. If not, which figures are inaccurate, and what should these figures be.
Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Foreign Minister has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s questions:

The figures quoted in the honourable Senator’s question are compatible with those held by the Government. I am informed, however, that while the figures give some indication of the relative stages of development of these two economies, some of the statistical items chosen for this purpose do not provide an adequate comparison.

The first two figures listed in the honourable Senator’s question, relating to per capita income in the PRC, are misleading in that they exclude income from the services sector (accounting for up to one-third of total income). In addition, those figures relating to food consumption and calorie and protein intake in the PRC are likely to understate the true position, in that a significant proportion of food production for personal consumption goes unrecorded. Finally, the last two statistics relating to the distribution of television sets and motor cars in the PRC and Taiwan, while accurate, are not very meaningful, given the industrial and consumer policies pursued by the Chinese Government since 1 949.

Reserve Bank: Record of Collection (Question No. 2300)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 20 November 1979:

Has some type of record of collections been introduced by the Reserve Bank, as outlined in the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Second Annual Report 1979, page 89; if so, what are the details.

Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The following information has been provided by the Reserve Bank of Australia:

The Reserve Bank appreciated the constructive suggestion ofthe Ombudsman and has been giving it careful consideration. Since the episode to which the Ombudsman referred, the Bank has introduced a new centralised system of handling documents in Sydney, without receipts. The Bank has also instituted a program of returning approved exchange control applications against bulk receipts in Melbourne, where the volume of traffic is much smaller.

Experience is that even a simple system of receipts, to be of some effectiveness, incurs expense in use of resources. While the Bank has not yet decided future arrangements on the basis of this experience, its preliminary assessment and its general experience in administration of exchange control over a long period points to the view that the expense of a system of receipts over the whole range of exchange control approvals would not be justified.

Taxation Office: Unclaimed Cheque Procedures (Question No. 2302)

Senator Colston:

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 2 1 November 1979:

Has the Taxation Office reviewed unclaimed cheque procedures, as mentioned in the Commonwealth Ombudsman ‘s Second Annual Report 1979, page 88; if so, what are the details of any changes made.

Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The Commissioner of Taxation has advised that, in the case mentioned by the Ombudsman, the taxpayer had lodged his income tax return at a branch office after moving from interstate. Shortly after lodging the return he advised the branch office of a further change of address.

At that time a manually kept register of returns lodged by taxpayers for the first time with the branch office had not been updated because of other demands imposed during the peak of the refund-issuing season. This inability to keep the registers up to date resulted in the assessment notice and refund cheque being forwarded to the taxpayer at the address shown in his income tax return. The notice and cheque were returned unclaimed before the register had been brought up to date with the result that follow-up action to issue a fresh cheque to the correct address was frustrated. The manuallykept registers have since been replaced by microfiche copies produced by computer. These copies are now updated each week. The Commissioner considers that this change in procedures should prevent a repetition of the circumstances reported by the Ombudsman.

Controls on Toxic Industrial Chemicals (Question No. 2316)

Senator Sibraa:
NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 21 November 1979:

Which Departments take responsibility for controls on potentially toxic industrial chemicals, what is the exact nature of controls on the use of toxic substances and how are restrictions enforced (see the answer to Senate Question No. 2050, Hansard, 13 November 1979, page 2228).

Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Prime Minister has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The States and Territories in Australia have the ultimate administrative responsibility for formal approval of the sale and use of potentially toxic industrial chemicals.

With respect to the Commonwealth, the responsibilities in these matters of the Departments of Health and Business and Consumer Affairs were outlined by my colleagues the Ministers for Health and Business and Consumer Affairs in their answers to Questions Nos 3507 and 2315.

The Australian Environment Council, with the assistance of the Department of Science and the Environment, has established a joint Commonwealth/State National Advisory Committee on Chemicals to implement its program on potentially hazardous chemicals. This Committee is currently drawing up procedures for the assessment of potential environmental effects of chemicals, and for the development of control measures for hazardous chemicals, including manufacture, transport, storage and disposal.

Qantas Centre, Sydney (Question No. 2353)

Senator Rocher:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 19 February 1980:

  1. 1 ) What is the estimated sale price of the Qantas Centre, Stage 1 project, in Sydney on completion of construction and fitting out.
  2. What will be the total area of office and other accommodation, on completion of the project.
  3. What is the market rate, as at 19 February 1980, for leasing similar accommodation in Sydney.
  4. Will the building be totally occupied by Qantas Airways Limited or is it intended to let any part of the completed building to others; if the latter, what is the proposed rental.
  5. As the present structure is designated Stage 1, is further construction proposed; if so (a) for what purpose; and (b) when is further work programmed to commence.
Senator Chaney:
LP

– The Minister for Transport has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. 1 ) An estimated sale price would depend on the date of completion, market prices then prevailing, the kind of purchasers who may then be in the market and the demand for a building with a life as long as that anticipated for the Qantas Stage I Centre, and with its facilities and key position in Sydney.
  2. 543,822 square feet of office and other accommodation including cur parking when the Stage 1 project and associated car parking facilities envisaged in the development approval are completed.
  3. There is no accommodation in Sydney completely similar to that in the Qantas Stage 1 Centre. The cost of leasing space in Sydney, as at 19 February 1980, depends on the level of the building which is leased, the area taken, the need for special facilities and features, whether these are provided by the lessor or the lessee, the nature of the use and many other factors.
  4. No. Those parts of the building not occupied by Qantas Airways Limited will be leased on a commercial basis, the rental of the space which will be leased cannot be finally determined until a firm completion date is known.
  5. (a) and (b) Construction of a second stage was embraced in the original development consent by the Sydney City Council. There are no present plans to construct Stage 2.

Alex Moumbaris (Question No. 2356)

Senator Mulvihill:
NEW SOUTH WALES

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 20 February 1 980:

  1. 1 ) When was Alex Moumbaris last issued with an Australian passport.
  2. Was such a passport valid in July 1972, when he was arrested at the South Africa-Botswana border post.
  3. What role did Australian authorities play in seeking the release of Mr Moumbaris from custody.
  4. Did the Minister study the comments of Mr Moumbaris, reported in the Weekend Australian dated 19-20 January 1980, in which he alleged that whilst the Australian Consul in Pretoria was helpful, any practical aid was vetoed in Canberra.
  5. Did the Department of Foreign Affairs in Canberra seek to take this case up on a Minister to Minister basis.
  6. Does Mr Moumbaris still possess an Australian passport.
Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Minister for Foreign Affairs has provided the following answers to the honourable senator’s questions:

  1. 1 ) Mr Moumbaris was issued with an Australian passport on 31 July 1968.
  2. Yes.
  3. In Mr Moumbaris’s case the Australian Embassy maintained contact with his lawyer, who is experienced in procedures under the Terrorism Act, and with the South African authorities in order to ensure that his interests as an Australian citizen and his rights to a fair trial were properly safeguarded. On 13 June 1975 an approach was made to the South African Department of Foreign Affairs regarding the possible deportation of Mr Moumbaris. The Embassy was advised on 26 August 1975 that the South African authorities would noi release Mr Moumbaris before 19 June 1985. There was no question of his being released before he had served his full sentence.
  4. The comments of Mr Moum baris reported in the Weekend Australian have been brought to my attention. 1 am advised that Mr Moumbaris received normal consular assistance, including regular visits by an Embassy Officer during the period he spent in gaol. The Australian authorities in fact extended to Mr Moumbaris all the assistance it was appropriate and possible to give to him. Any suggestion that the Australian Government has sympathy for the apartheid policy of South Africa is utterly without foundation, lt has consistently expressed its support for those who seek to change the apartheid system by peaceful means.
  5. lt is not a function of Australian Missions abroad to seek the release from custody of Australians who are convicted and imprisoned in another country under the laws of that country. The Australian Government is unequivocally opposed to apartheid and to the deprivation of civil rights of those who oppose it by peaceful means. On the other hand, the Australian Government is on record as having said it is opposed to the use of violence as a means to ending the system of apartheid and this has been the basis of our position that no special formal approach to the South African authorities was warranted on Mr Moumbaris’s behalf. Consequently the case was not taken up on a Minister to Minister basis as there were no grounds for complaint or representation by the Australian Government.
  6. Mr Moumbaris was issued with a new Australian passport on 10 January 1980.

New South Wales Registrar of Bankruptcy (Question No. 2367)

Senator Mulvihill:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs, upon notice, on 20 February 1 980:

  1. 1 ) Why has the New South Wales Registrar of Bankruptcy failed to discipline Mr David Hughes of Foley Street, East Sydney, despite threats to the bankruptcy authority in Sydney.
  2. What co-operation does the NSW Registrar of Bankruptcy receive from the New South Wales Department of Main Roads.
  3. Was information denied to the Registrar by the Department of Main Roads in regard to the future use of Foley Street, East Sydney.
Senator Durack:
LP

– The Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

I believe the references in this question are to the Official Receiver, Sydney, who is the trustee ofthe bankrupt estate of David Roy Hughes of Foley Street, East Sydney. On that basis:

1 ) The Official Receiver has had no cause to discipline Mr Hughes. The Official Receiver can take action only if a bankrupt offends against the Act. I am advised that Mr Hughes has not committed any offence against the Bankruptcy Act and there has not been any allegation of any such offences. The official Receiver has not been threatened in any way by Mr Hughes.

The Official Receiver has always obtained full cooperation from the NSW Department of Main Roads when he has had need of assistance.

No.

Cabinet and Cabinet Committee Meeting’s (Question No. 2368)

Senator Walsh:

asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 19 February 1 980:

Will the Prime Minister cite any precedents wherby previous governments have refused to disclose whether Cabinet or Cabinet Committee meetings have been held, as indicated in his answer to Senate Question No. 2061 (see Senate Hansard, 23 November 1979, p. 2292).

Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Prime Minister has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

My answer to Question No. 206 1 , in indicating that details of Cabinet and Cabinet Committee meetings have been regarded as confidential by successive governments, was based upon, and was entirely consistent with, the best practices under the conventions of Cabinet confideniality and collective responsibility. Successive governments in Australia have accepted those conventions.

I would not propose to have the Hansards combed to check whether previous governments have, on all occasions, observed those conventions. J merely repeat that I do not intend adopting a practice of making public, details of Cabinet or other meetings of Ministers, such as who did not attend particular meetings.

Australia Resources Development Bank Ltd (Question No. 2394)

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 20 February 1980:

  1. 1 ) What have been the lending commitments of the Australian Resources Development Bank Ltd in each year from 1975to 1979.
  2. What amounts have been lent to: (a) Australian companies; and (b) overseas companies.
  3. Has any definition been provided for the Australian Resources Development Bank’s criterion that a borrower should have ‘a reasonable degree of Australian ownership in its capital structure’.
  4. How many overseas companies applied to borrow from the Australian Resources Development Bank in each year from 1972 to 1979 and how many were successful.
  5. 5 ) Which companies were unsuccessful.
Senator Carrick:
LP

– The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

The following information has been provided by the Australian Resources Development Bank Ltd (ARDB).

and (2) ARDB’s lending commitments for the years ending September 1 975 to 1979 inclusive are as follows:

For the purpose of the above breakdown, an Australian company is regarded as one that has 50 per cent or more of its capital owned by Australians.

ARDB does not have a policy criterion on what is a reasonable degree of Australian ownership of a borrower’s capital structure as it prefers to make a case by case judgment on each application. The prime emphasis in these judgments is the assistance of Australian interests in achieving the commercial development ofthe natural resource without dilution of Australian equity in the project that may result from foreign financing. ARDB also recognises as eligible borrowers wholly overseas-owned companies that hold the necessary Government approvals for participation in a natural resource development scheme.

and (5) Statistics are not available. However, ARDB’s prime objective is to provide financial assistance to Australian interests and no loan applications in respect or prospective end-borrowers with some Australian ownership have been unsuccessful on grounds of ownership.

Telephone Services: Suffolk Park Area of Byron Bay (Question No. 2400)

Senator Douglas McClelland:
NEW SOUTH WALES · ALP

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Post and Telecommunications, upon notice, on 19 February 1980:

When is it expected that telephone lines will be available to provide additional services to the Suffolk Park area of Byron Bay in New South Wales.

Senator Chaney:
LP

– The Minister for Post and Telecommunications has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

Telecom advises that the Byron Bay Exchange was extended by 200 lines on 27 February 1980 and this has allowed work to proceed in the connection of deferred applications in the Suffolk Park area.

It is expected that all outstanding applications will be connected by the end of May 1980.

Qantas Airways Ltd: Stage One Project in Sydney (Question No. 2401)

Senator Rocher:

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 19 February 1980:

  1. 1 ) How can disclosure of the amount of public money spent on arbitrator’s and legal fees affect in any way the outcome of arbitration in connection with construction of the Qantas Airways Limited Stage One Project in Sydney, as claimed in the Minister’s answer to Question No. 220 1 .
  2. How can disclosure of an estimate of total costs affect the outcome of the arbitration.
  3. Why can the number of legal representatives not be disclosed.
  4. How can information as to the numbers of Queen’s Counsel, barristers and solicitors retained by Qantas affect the outcome of the arbitration.
  5. Can the amount of any claim, counter-claim or offset not be publicly disclosed, as in any normal civil action before the Courts; if not, how would such disclosure affect the outcome of the arbitration.
Senator Chaney:
LP

– The Minister for Transport has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

  1. ) and (2) Public discussion of the arbitrators fees whilst proceedings before the arbitrators (whose fees are being discussed ) are pending may prejudice the continuance of the arbitration before those arbitrators. Legal costs are committed to the determination of the arbitrators as a discretionary matter and disclosure at this stage of the actual costs to Qantas may be claimed to prejudice the fair determination of that issue.
  2. and (4) The two arbitrations on foot are being heard before different arbitrators (two in each of the proceedings) at the insistence of the builder, Dillingham Australia Limited, requiring different Counsel in each. Qantas has two Senior and two Junior Counsel in one of the arbitrations and one Senior and one Junior Counsel in the other, shorter, arbitration. The builder has retained five barristers, two of whom are Senior Counsel. Each Party has one solicitor.
  3. Arbitrations are conducted in private and not, as are Court proceedings, in public. It has been claimed by the builder, Dillingham Australia Limited, that the making public of material revealed before the arbitrators is contrary to law. Without conceding that this claim is correct, Senior Counsel has advised that to make public during the course of the hearing matters which are being dealt with in the hearing may give rise to a claim that Qantas has acted improperly and that as a consequence the proceedings, one of which has now been in the course of hearing since 1978, should be aborted.

Unemployment Benefit Work Test (Question No. 2406)

Senator Grimes:

asked the Minister for Social

Security, upon notice, on 20 February 1980:

  1. 1 ) Does the Commonwealth Employment Service inform the Department of Social Security of persons registered for unemployment benefit who fail the work test.
  2. Are these statistics kept; if so, in what form; if not, why not.
Senator Dame Margaret Guilfoyle:
LP

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

  1. Yes.
  2. See my answer to your Question No. 2410 (Hansard, 15 April 1980) which sets out the numbers of terminations of unemployment benefit recipients.

Unemployment Benefit (Question No. 2410)

Senator Grimes:

asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 20 February 1 980:

  1. 1 ) How many unemployment beneficiaries in each Social Security Department office have had their unemployment benefit terminated in the year ending 31 January 1980.
  2. How many benefits were terminated of people in the following age groups: (a) 16-17 years; (b) 18-20 years; (c) 21-24 years; (d) 25-44 years; (e) 45-54 years; and (f) 55 years and over.
  3. What, in each classification kept by the Department, were the reasons for the terminations.
Senator Dame Margaret Guilfoyle:
LP

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

  1. 1 ) The number of unemployment beneficiaries in each Department of Social Security Regional Office who had their unemployment benefit terminated in the year ended 31 January 1980 is not held on ADP records. However, the number of unemployment benefits terminated in Australia for that period is estimated at 787,000.
  2. and (3) As indicated in my reply of 25 September 1979 to your Question on Notice No. 1801, the Department of Social Security is developing a collection of statistics on terminations of unemployment benefit Tables have been designed showing selected characteristics of beneficiaries whose benefit was terminated during a specified period. Data are not available for areas smaller than States.

Preliminary data are now to hand for the four months of September. October, November and December 1979. Statistics in relation to Tasmania are excluded for all months and the data for October also exclude Victoria. Difficulties have been experienced in extracting statistical data on terminated cases from the computer masterfile. The vetting and validating ofthe information is currently being undertaken and the collections must be regarded as being only in the development stage. Some preliminary data on the matters you have raised are shown in the following tables. The reasons given for termination of benefit in Table 2 are broad since detailed data on the precise reasons for terminations are not reliable. The quality of data should improve with the progressive introduction of the new national benefit system covering the ADP processing and payment system for unemployment sickness and special benefits. The new system is intended to be introduced initially with South Australia commencing in April 1980.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 15 April 1980, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1980/19800415_senate_31_s84/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant