[Thursday. 30 April 1981]138

Thursday, 30 April 1981

The SPEAKER (Mr Thompson) took theChair at 10.45 a.m., and read prayers.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT:OFFICES OF PROFIT

Inquiry by Joint Select Committee:Council's Concurrence

Message from the Council received and readnotifying that it had considered the Assembly'sresolution, and had resolved-

(1) To agree to the re-appointment of aJoint Seleet Committee of theLegislative Assembly and the LegislativeCouncil in accordance with the terms ofthe Resolution transmitted to theLegislative Council by Message No. 3 ofthe Legislative Assembly.

(2) That the Resolution, so far as it isinconsistent with Standing Orders, haveeffect notwithstanding anythingcontained in the Standing Orders andthat any member be entitled to sil on theJoint Select Committee notwithstandingthe provisions of Standing Order 340.

(3) That the Legislative Council berepresented on the Joint SelectCommittee by the following members,namely-

The Hon. N. E. BaxterThe Hon. V. J. FerryThe Hon. R. HetheringtonThe Hon. N. McNeillThe Hon. H. W. Olney

(4) That the Hon. N. McNeill be theChairman of the Joint SelectCommittee.

(5) That a message be sent to theLegislative Assembly acquainting it ofthis Resolution.

BILLS (6): INTRODUCTIONAND FIRST REA DI NC

I.Valuation of Land Amendment Bill.

Bill introduced, on motion by Sir CharlesCourt (Treasurer), and read a first time.

2. Seeds Bill.

3. Wheat Bags Repeal Bill.

Bills introduced, on motions by Mr Old(Minister for Agriculture), and read afirst time.

4. Local Government Amendment Bill (No.2).

Bill introduced, on motion by Mrs Craig(Minister for Local Government), andread a first time.

5, Misuse of Drugs Bill.6. Acts Amendment (Misuse of Drugs) Bill.

Bills introduced, on motions by Mr Hassell(Minister for Police and Traffic), andread a first time.

ACTS AMENDMENT(ELECTORAL PROVINCES AND

DISTRICTS) BILL

Leave to IntroduceMR HASSELL (Cottesoe-Ch ief Secretary)

[10,5 2 a.m.]1: I move-That leave be given to introduce a Bill for

an Act to amend the Constitution ActsAmendment Act 1899-1980 and theElectoral Districts Act 1947-1975.

Question put and a division called for.Bells rung and the House divided.

Remarks during Division

Mr Hassell: The champions of democracy whodecide issues before they know what they are.

Mr B. T. Burke: I'd trust Darcy Duggan, too,with my valuables, before he pinches them!

Mr Nanovich: A good friend of yours!

Mr H. D. Evans: Reminds us of someone weknow.

Mr B. T. Burke: If a lion tells you he does noteat meat, don't believe him, my friend.

Result of Division

Division resulted as follows-

Mr BlaikieMr ClarkoSir Charles CourtMr CowanM rCoyneMrs CraigMr CraneDr DadourMIT CraydenM r GrewarMr HassellM r HerzfeldMr P. V. Jones

Ayes 25Mr MePharlinMr NanovichM r O'ConnorMr OldM rSibsonM r SpriggsM r Tret howanMr TubbyMr WaitMr WilliamsMr YoungMr Sh alders

(Teller)

1387

388[ASSEMBLY]

Mr BertranmMr BryceMr B. T. BurkeMr T. J. BurkeMr CarrMr DaviesMr H. D. Evans

AyesMr LauranceMr RushtonMr SodenmanMr MacKinnonMr Mensaros

Noes 14Mr HtarmanMr HlodgeMr JamniesonMr MclverM r ParkerM r TaylorMr Biateman

PairsNoes

Mr BarnettMr F. T. EvansM r T. H. JonesMr SkidmoreMr Grill

(Teller)

Question thus passed: leave granted.

First Reading

The SPEAKER: The question is-That the Bill be now read a first time.

Question put. and a division called for.

Bells rung and the House divided.

Remarks during Division

Mr B. T. Burke: You are strange; no-one onyour side has ever been able to explain why weneed more members of Parliament.

Mr Young: Take another dose!Mr B. T. Burke: Here is another chance. Why

do you not tell us why we need more members ofParliament'?

Mr Hassell: You want to debate the Bill you donot. want to introduce, do you'?

Mr B. T. Burke: We have to sack nurses, andyet here we are to have more members ofParliament.

Mr Sibson: You are a bit short on yourself thismlorni ng.

Sir Charles Court: Let them be seen for whatthey are.

Mr B. T. Burke: These things have a funny wayof going off the tracks, my friend.

Mr Davies: The Premier will be seen for whathe is-a worker of rorts.

Mr B. T. Burke: Even The West Australiandoes not agree with you this time.

Sir Charles Court: That is not unusual.Mr B. T. Burke: Better pop down and tell The

West Australian to lean on its people.Mr Bryce: Hlavent( you convinced the editor

that they are all baddies in the Press Gallery yet?The SPEAKER: Lock the doors. The question

is that the Bill be read it first time. Those of thatopinion will say "Aye" and pass to the right of the

Chair and those against will say "No" and pass tothe left of the Chair. I appoint the member forMurray teller for the Ayes and the member forCanning teller for the Noes.

Points of Order

Sir CHARLES COURT: I rise on a point oforder. While you were making your statement,Sir, the member for Ascot referred to me as atgreat thug. I takec exception to that statement,and I ask for those words to be withdrawn.

The SPEAKER: I did not hear the remark, butit appears it was made. In the circumstances Iwould ask the member for Ascot to withdraw itbecause I believe it to be an unparliamentaryterm.

Mr BRYCE: I Find it hard to imagine that thePremier finds the truth so difficult to [ace.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member willresume his seat. Hie has been called upon by theChair to make a withdrawal and he must do sowithout qualification. I ask him to withdraw theremark.

Mr B. T. BURKE: Mr Speaker, my point oforder is that it is not within the scope of StandingOrders to make unparliamentary that which 24hours previously was considered to beparliamentary, and the fact-

The SPEAKER: Order! The member willresume his seat. The terir was not considered tobe parliamentary; indeed, I warned the memberfor Balcatta to desist. On that occasion he did notmake reference to any particular person and Itook it as a general comment. On this occasionthe remark obviously was made directly to aparticular member and in the circumstances awithdrawal is required. I ask the inenmher forAscot to withdraw the remark withoutqualification.

Mr BERTRAM: It appears the Premier hatssome objection to something which was said. I didnot hear what was said or what he is objecting to.In order that I may be acquainted with what isgoing on I would be most obliged if you. Sir,would tell us what it is the Premier is complainingabout.

Mr B. T. Burke: The Speaker said he didn'thear it. either.

The SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Inpoint of fact the Premier drew my attention towhat was said and if the member for Mt.Hawthorn did not hear what the menmber forAscot said, surely he should have heard what the

1388

[Thursday, 30 April 1981)18

premier said when he rose and deliberately askedthat the member for Ascot withdraw his remark. Irequest the member for Ascot to make anunqualified withdrawal.

Mr BRYCE: I withdraw.

The SPEAKER: Thank you.

Mr Bryce: I shall have the opportunity toexplain the truth subsequently.

Mr B. T. Burke: It really means you areaccepted ats thugs in general but not in particular.

Mr Bryce: A Government of thugs is all right.but let us not impugn the integrity of theindividual who leads it. A bunch of thugs'

Several members interjected.The SPEAKER: Order! It seems to me that

bearing in mind the stance I have taken in respectof the use of that word members should desistfrom using it. If members continue to refer toothers on the opposite side of the I-ouse as thugs Iwill have to take some action.

Mr Davies: They should remember that overthere, too.

Mr Mclver: I think it is going to be one ofthose days!

Mr Bryce: Continued political corruption.

Result of DivisionlDivision resulted as follows-

Ayes 25Mr Blaikie Mr MePharlinMr Clarko Mr N a novichSir Charles Court Mr O'ConnorMr Cowan Mr OldMr Coyne Mr SibsonMrs; Craig M r SpriggsMr Crane Mr TrethowanO~r Dadour Mr TubbyMr Grayden Mr WatMr Grew-ar Mr WilliamsMr IHassell Mr YoungMr Herzfeld Mr ShaldcrsM r P. V. Jones (Tc11cr)

Noes I5MIr Bertram Mr HtarmnMr Bryce Mr ItlodgeMr B. T. Burke Mr JanmiesonMr T . Burke Mr MclverMr Carr Mr ParkerMr Davies M r TaylorMr H. 1). Evans Mr BatemanMr Grill (Tellcr)

PairsAyes

Mr LauranceMr RushtonMr SodemanMr MacKinnonMr Mensaros

Question thus passed.

NoesMr BarnettMr E. T. EvansM r T. HI. JonesMr SkidnmoreMr Bridge

Bill read a first time.

As to Second Reading

MR HASSELL (Cottesloc-Chief Secretary)11ll05 ant.: I move-

That the second reading of this Bill bemade an order of the day for the next sittingof the House.

Mr Bryce: Shame upon you!Question put and a division called for.

Bells rung and the House divided.

Remarks during Division

Mr Davies: Spending Government moneyunnecessarily.

Mr B. T. Burke: The Opposition hasconsistently sought an explanation of why weneed more members of Parliament, and no-onehas been able to explain.

Mr Davies: They have dodged it every time.Mr B. T. Burke: Why is it necessary'?Mr Clarko: Why should we answer someone

like you'?Mr Sibson: We need them to make up for your

incompetence.Mr B. T. Burke: Can you explain, at a time

when the Government is sacking nurses andcutting back on facilities, why we are putting onmore members of Parliament?

Mr Bryce: Don't they squirm when they knowthey are doing something crooked. Look at them!

Mr Clarko: We need a microscope to see you.Mr Bryce: When you see me you will never find

me doing anything crooked like this.Mr B. T. Burke: What is the justification for

extra members of Parliament? You are closingdown high schools but putting on extra membersof Parliament.

Mr Old: Why don't you ask Mr Dowding'? Hewill tell you he wants an extra member.

Mr B. T. Burke: There has never been anyexplanation.

Mr Davies: There never will be: it is like thedrawing of the boundary for the metropolitanarea.

Mr B. T. Burke: Every time the Liberal Partydevelops feet of clay we get new members.

Mr Clarko: Why don't yoit make a speech atthe proper time?

Mr B. T. Burke: I find it hard to be interestedin anything you say.

1389

1390 [ASSEMBLY]

Mr Davies: We will try to drag out theinformation if the Government will not give itvoluntarily.

Mr Jamieson: It must be pretty bad ifWest Australian will not have a bar of it.

The

Result of Division

Division resulted as follows-

Mr BlaikieMr CtarkoSir Charles CourtMr CoyneMrs CraigMr CraneDr DadourMr GraydenMr GrewarMr HassellMr HerzfeldMr P. V. Jones

Mr BertramMr BryceMr B. T. BurkeMr T. J. BurkeMr CarrMr DaviesMr H. D. EvansMr Grill

AyesMr LauranceMr RushtonMr SodemanMr Maci~innonMr Mensaros

Ayes 24Mr MePharlinMr NanovichMr O'ConnorMr OldMr SibsonMr SpriggsMr TrcthowanMr TubbyMr WattMr WilliamsMr YoungMr Shalders

Noes 16Mr HarmanMr HodgeMr JamiesonMr MclverMr ParkerMr PearceMr TaylorMr Bateman

PairsNoes

Mr BarnettMr E. T. EvansM rT. H. JonesMr SkidmoreMr Bridge

(Teller)

Question thus passed.

TRANSPORT AMENDMENT BILL

Introduction and First Reading

Bill introduced, on motion by Sir Charles Court(Premier), and read a first time.

GRAIN MARKETING AMENDMENTBILL

Report

Report of Committee adopted.

Third Reading

Leave granted to proceed forthwith to the thirdreading.

Bill read a third time, on motion by Mr Old(Minister for Agriculture), and transmitted to theCouncil,

SUPERANNUATION AND FAMILYBENEFITS AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

SIR CHARLES COURT (Nedlands-Treasurer) 1 11.10 am.]: I move-

That the Bill be now read a second time.This Bill proposes to amend the Superannuationand Family Benefits Act to end a practice whichis contrary to the principles on which the fund isbased and which could threaten the viability ofthe fund if present trends were allowed tocontinue. The practice in question is that ofcontributors being able to withdraw pastcontributions from the fund by reducing thenumber of units for which they had elected tocontribute or by changing from the aged 60retirement table of contributions to the aged 65retirement table for which unit contribution ratesare lower.

This is a complex matter with consequences tothe structure and viability of the fund which maynot be readily apparent. If members will bearwith me, it warrants a careful and necessarilysomewhat technical explanation. Also the roots ofthe matter go back to the early days of the fund;and some historical background is necessary to anunderstanding of how the present situation hasdeveloped.

When the superannuation scheme commencedoperation in 1939, eligible employees who decidedto become contributors were rcquircd tocontribute for units of pension in accordance withan entitlement scale related to salary: that is tosay, although membership was voluntary, thosejoining the scheme were required to take up theirfull unit entitlement as determined by theirsalary. For many lower salaried employees, it wassoon apparent that this meant a choice had to bemade between joining the scheme and payingsignificant fortnightly contributions, and, at thesame time denying themselves in the future theright to either the whole or part ofCommonwealth social service benefits to whichthey might otherwise have become entitled, orelecting not to join the scheme. This situation wasno doubt regarded as unnecessarily harsh onlower salaried employees who stood to gain littlefrom the scheme; and in 1945 the Act wasamended to provide that contributors couldcontribute for any number of units between aminimum of two and a maximum, determined aspreviously, in accordance with salary.

To ensure that members who had joined thescheme between 1939 and 1945 and had beenrequired to take up their maximum unitentitlement were placed on the same footing as

1390

[Thursday, 30 A pril 19811 19

new members. the amending legislation gavecontributors the right to surrender any number ofunits in excess of two. The amendment alsoconferred upon the board discretionary power toeither refund the surplus contributions or applythem to meeting the cost of the units retained,that being the arrangement already applying incases where a contributor's salary was reduced.

Since that time, the Superannuation Board hasaccepted the view that the Act, as currentlyworded, permits contributors to reduce their unitholding at any time and claim a refund of pastcontributions. It has therefore followed thepractice of accepting such elections and. afterapplying any credit towards paying the full cost ofthe reduced number of units, refunding any, excessas a cash payment. It will be seen that thepractice of contributors reducing units of penstonand receiving refunds has been going on for over30 years. The question may then be asked: why,after all that time, is it necessary to change thearrangement? The answer is that for Imany yearsthe provision was little used by contributors otherthan in cases w'here changed family circumstancesor hardship led them to seek to reduce the amountof their contributions.

Howvever. in recent years increasing numbers ofcontributors arc opting to adjust their unitholding, not because of unforeseen circumstances.but to obtain the moneys that result from suchaction, and in this context, they are blatantlyabusing the arrangement. To illustrate this fact.many contributors who have paid considerablesumis of money into the scheme have beenapplying to reduce their units to the minimumn oftwo, receiving a refund of most of theircontributions, and, on production of a medicalcertificate. repurchasing the surrendered units.WVhile this action results in the contributor payinga higher contribution rate, very little equi tyretmains in the fund to offset the cost of death anddisablement benefits which may become payable,and this in turn imposes a greater liability on thleother members of the fund who do not engage inthis practice.

The Superannuation Board has been concerneddeeply about the financial viability of the fund ifcontributors retain the right to manipulate theirsuperannuation in this manner and, particularly.about the increasing nuniber of contributorsengaging in the practice. Furthermore, therefunding of contributions while the memberremains tn service ts contrary to the fundamentalphilosophy of superannuati.on schemes whichimply that benefits should not become availableuntil retirement.

It is important to remember thatsuperannuation payments enjoy special treatmentunder the income tax laws; and we have anobligation to ensure that we do not support anarrangement that could bring the fund intoconflict with the Commonwealth taxationdepartment. It would be irresponsible of the boardto jeopardise the position of genuine contributorsby condoning apparent doubtful practices.

As a matter of interest, none of thesuperannuation schemes established by theGovernments of the Commonwealth and the otherStates, for their employees, permits its membersto withdraw funds from the scheme while theycontinue to be employed.

In the knowledge of the history of theSuperannuatton and Family Benefits Act theGovernment decided that the right of contributorsto adjust their unit holding and/or their retiringage should not be changed as these rights conformwith the philosophy of a voluntary superannuationscheme. However, the Government decided tochange the present legislation to provide thatexcess contributions arising from such electionsshould remain in the fund, accumulating interestat a rate decided by the board, until retirement.

In the course of examining the need to amendlegislation. a doubt arose about the legality ofapproving the refunding of moneys in eases ofreduction in units other than where salaryreductions occurred. Doubts were expressed alsoas to whether the legislation permitted refunds tobe made following retiring age variations.although the right to vary retiring age is not inquestion. When the board received this advice, itresolved immediately not to process applicationsby contributors to reduce units and receive cashrefunds from the fund or to refund creditsoccurring fromt decisions by contributors to extendthe age of their retirements.

The Bill proposes to place beyond doubt theposition of contributors and the SuperannuationBoard in regard to these matters.

I turn now to the specific intentions of the Billwhich are to-

(a) provide that where contributors elect toreduce units of pensions or amend theirretiring age. any resultant excesscontributions are to renain in the fund:

(b) empower the Superannuation Board todetermine, from time to time. the rate ofinterest to be paid on such credits:

(c) clarify the legal entitlement ofpensioners to reduce the number of unitsfor which they contribute:

1391

1392 [ASSEMBLY]

(d) validate the past practice of theSuperannuation Board of refundingexcess contributions; and

(e) validate the recent decision of the boardnot to process applications currentlybefore it to participate in thesepractices.

Another matter not contained in the notes I havegiven to the Leader of the Opposition is one towhich I should invite the attention of members.Clause 2 reads as follows-

2. This Act shall be deemed to have comeinto operation on 13 April 1981.

A number of dates were discussed. One was thedate of introduction of the Bill; another was thedate of the Press announcement by the Premier.Eventually, after consultation with the board, itwas decided that the fairest date to accept was 13April which, I understand, was the date on whichthe Superannuation Board made it known that it'would not process any more of these applications.

Mr Davies: Was it discussed with any of thecontributing groups-the Civil ServiceAssociation, or any other organisation?

Sir CHARLES COURT-. The Leader of theOpposition knows that there is statutoryrepresentation on the board. I raised a query onthis matter, and I was assured that the board wasabsolutely unanimous in its desire to have thischange made, and to have the clarificationintroduced. The board realises and accepts, as Ido, that what is now being practised-and it wasgaining momentum-is contrary to the basicprinciples for a fund of this kind, and is againstthe interests of those who go along quietly,continuing to pay their contributions.

It will be apparent to members that the idea ofreceiving one's money back and then buying inthe same number of units-even though at ahigher rate-one would be buying in at a timewhen the fund is most vulnerable in respect ofthat contributor.

What the board seeks to do is fair andequitable in the circumstances and I am quitecertain that, knowing the people involved as I do,they have looked at all aspects of the matter in anendeavour to be fair to all concerned and, moreparticularly, to be fair to all the contributors.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Debate adjourned, on motion by Mr Davies(Leader of the Opposition).

CLEAN AIR AMENDMENT BILL

In Comimittee

Resumed from 29 April. The Chairman ofCommittees (Mr Clarko) in the Chair: Mr Young(Minister for Health) in charge of Ithe Bill.

Clause 5: Section 8 amended-Progress was reported after the clause had been

partly considered.Mr HODGE: This clause is the one about

which we argued at some length yesterday. Itincreases the membership of the council by two,from 15 to 17 members. The two additionalappointees are comprised of a representative fromThe Confederation of Western AustralianIndustry (Inc.) and a representative from theLocal Government Association of WesternAustralia.

As I said yesterday, the Opposition is stronglyopposed to the expansion of the committee,because it is far too large already. Such anexpansion will add to the problems involved inmaking the council an efficient and successfulorgan isation.

When I raised the query yesterday, it wasexplained to me it was necessary to have twopersons to represent local government, becausetwo separate local government associations wereinvolved. On the surface, that sounds feasible, butwhen one looks at the situation, it can be seenthat the argument does not hold water. In fact,only one of the associations has been named in thelegislation. Therefore, if the purpose of having anadditional appointee is to represent two differentassociations-I do not believe it is-in fact thelegislation will not achieve that, because it namesonly the association which representsmetropolitan shires.

That was a weak excuse thought up on the spurof the moment. However, at least it was anexcuse, because no excuse at all has been offeredfor the other additional appointment: that is, thecreation of a fourth representative from TheConfederation of Western Australian Industry(Inc.).

I find it strange that the confederation needsfour people to represent it when the TLC and allthe other organisations involved have to make dowith one representative. Either the TLCrepresentative is four times as competent as therepresentatives from the confederation, or theconfederation people are very incompetent if ittakes four of them to put the point of view of oneorganisation.

I do not believe the Minister's proposition thatthe needs of industry, etc. had to be balanced on

1392

[Thursday, 30 April 1981]139

this committee, because that is not the purpose ofthis body. It is not a committee for the benefit orenjoyment of the confederation or any otherassociation. It has been created as a wvatchdog toguard the public interest and ensure the airremains as unpolluted as possible. Therefore, it isillogical to upgrade the representation fromprivate industry. After all, those involved inprivate industry are the main offenders in thisarea: they are the people who pollute the air.They are the main people with whom the councilhas to work and the activities of whom it mustkeep within the law.

The efficient operation of this statutoryorganisation will be frustrated if the Governmentstacks it with representatives from privateindustry. That wvill not improve the efficiency ofthe operation of the council. It is a public bodyand it was created to look after the interests of thepublic. Indeed, if it is intended that the councilshould have such a large number of members, Ishould like to see more representatives from thepublic area. Perhaps there should be a consumerrepresentative on the council. However, I see nogood reason for increasing the size of the councilby two additional appointments.

I raised a matter briefly with the Ministeryesterday and I should appreciate an answer to i ttoday. I asked why the University of WesternAustralia was invited to submit the name of aperson to sit on the Clean Air Pollution ControlCouncil whilst the other tertiary institutions inthis State were ignored.

We have now a second university in thisState-that is. Murdoch University-and thereare also a number of other tertiary institutions. Itseems strange that those institutions are excludedfrom putting forward a candidate. It is possiblethe most suitable. qualified person in this State torepresent a tertiary institution may be a personfrom Murdoch University. WAIT, or one of theother tertiary institutions. However, under thislegislation that person would be prohibited fromsitting on the Air Pollution Control Council.' Thatsituation should be rectified. It "'ill act as animpediment also to the advisory council, becausethe same stipulation applies to both these bod ies.

Mr YOUNG: Yesterday the member forMelville made most of the points he has madetoday, but it is quite proper that he refer to themagain in the Committee stage of the Bill today.This clause deals with the increasedrepresentation of certain organisations on the AirPollution Control Council.

I point out to the member for Melville that, inaddition to the fact that one extra member of The

Confederation of Western Australian Industry(Inc.) has been added to the council, plus amember of the Local Government Association.provision has been made for an additionalmember representing the Department ofConservation and Environment who will replacethe representative nominated previously by theDepartment of Local Government.

What has happened to the representation onthis particular council to which the member takesexception is that there has been a shift ofemphasis, but it has taken a different form fromthat set out by the member.

The Confederation of WA Industry (Inc.) willincrease its representation by one. I pointed outyesterday I could see nothing reprehensible in thefact that,* on a body such as this where theindustry is well and truly outnumbered byrepresentatives of Government and other bodies,it should have another representative to put thepoints of view of industry. It will not necessarilybe on a "gang-up" basis as suggested by themember for Melville, but rather it is for thepurpose of balancing the opinions which might beformed from time to time by the Air PollutionControl Council.

If members look at the additional appointmentsprovided for in the legislation, they wvill see onenew member from the Local GovernmentAssociation and one new member from TheConfederation of WA Industry (Inc.) may beappointed. On past experience, it is clear boththose members will be particularly concernedabout the pollution of the air.

The member representing the LocalGovernment Association will almost eertainlyhave had the experience of ratepayers, ratepayergroups, or individual persons who live within theparticular local authority he or she represents.coming to the local authority and complaining insome way or another of air pollution.

Indeed, the local authorities connected mostelosely with industrial areas which in the pastcaused air pollution, have been plagued bycomplaints. I refer specifically to the Shire ofCockburn with regard to certain industrial plantsin the Kwinana area which emit and cannot avoidemitting some degree of air pollution. I might addthat over recent years pollution control in thatarea has improved out of sight; nonetheless, thatlocal authority and others have a vested interest inthe council to ensure the very best methods areadopted to control air pollution: and there is nodoubt the representative of the Department ofConservation and Environment has such a vestedinterest.

1393

394[ASSEMBLY]

The representative from the Confederation ofWA Industry-he will broaden the view of thecouncil-will be outnumbered by people whosevested interests clearly will be seen to prevent airpollution.

The member for Melville insisted on the use ofthe word 'stacked' in regard to the number ofrepresentatives on the council. I cannot preventhis using that word: and certainly nothing iswrong with his making that suggestion other thanshe fact that he is totally incorrect. It is clear toanyone who can make a calculation of at fractionthat the council is not stacked withrepresentatives of industry. Quite clearly they willbe outnumbered by all other groups which have avested interest in ensuring any pollution controlmethods are proper.

The other point made by the member forMelville related to the University of WesternAustralia. To date the member has espoused thecause of at smaller council, but almost in ihc samebreath he said he wanted an explanation as towhy the university should be the only tertiaryeducation body represented on the council. I anmnot an educator and I am not qualified to judgethe expertise or standing of one institutioncompared with another; however, I would say theUniversity of Western Australia would be pre-eniinent in academic circles in this State. If themember wants to be consistent he should acceptthe fact that if I were to agree to theproposition-he did not exactly advance thisbecause he asked only for information, althoughcertainly he inherently suggested this-that alltertiary institutions be represented on thecouncil-

Mr Hodge: You misunderstood me. I did notsay in addition. I think they ought to be availablefor selection. There should still be only onerepresentative, but you should widen your area ofselect ion.

Mr YOUNG: I am sorry I missedl the point themember made. I understood him to mecan furtherrepresentations ought to be made fromt othertertiary institutions. Obviously the thrust of whathe said was that the selection ought 10 be madefrom all tertiary institutions. In tha-t case I amsorry the answer I intended to give in regard tohis point is based on a misunderstanding. andwhat I intended to say will not be sufficient. Imust further consider that matter," and I give themember an undertaking that I will do just that.

Mr BERTRAM: We have just heard atcompletely unsatisfactory explanation: in fact, atpurported answer to the case put forward by theshadow Minister for lIIcalth. the nmenmber for

Melville. The reply of the Minister for Health wasthoroughly inadequate. It consisted of generalisedcomments which did not meet satisfactorily theargument put forward by the Opposition.

The Air Pollution Control Council as it standspresently has npproximatcly-l do not know theexact nuniber-14, 15 or 20 members, and thatnumber in itself is enough to cause reasonable andprudent people to be concerned-the council isvery large indeed.

When we have councils, committees,executives, or the like, with many representativeson them, there is a grave risk that the council,committee or executive, or whatever it is called,ceases 10 be efficient or effective and becomesburied in grey areas and unable to make clear andprecise decisions. It will find itself not beingactive and only appearing to do its job. TheGovernment wants to increase further the numberof representatives on the Air Pollution ControlCouncil and thereby place it in aI danger greaterthan it has been in. One should no, do those sortsof things unless one is of the opinion that acommittee or couneil is not doing its job. If acommittee or council is doing its job, why shouldthe number of members on it be increased? If acommittee or council is doing its job why shouldthe number of members on it be decreased'? Itmay be the Air Pollution Control Council is notdoing its job. Certainly clear and uninistakeableevidence is available to show the council is notdoing its job.

I refer niembers to question 614 of I5 Aprilthis year. The first part states-

How many successful prosecutions haveoccurred during the past five years forbreaches of the Clean Air Act?

The answer to that is "One', and that does notseem to be the sort of statistic to stir greatenthusiasmn over the performance of the council.It could be the council is doing its job and onesuccessful prosecution is enough: but on theoverwhelming probability what is the answer?The answer is that the council is not doing its jobadequately. We have had one successfulprosecution in five years. On the balance ofprobabilities, is that satisfactory?! Theoverwhelming probability is that it is thoroughlyunsatisfactory, and if it is thoroughlyunsatisfactory we should not increase the numberof members on the council, we should, if anything.reduce the number of members on it.

The second part of question 614 reads-I ow many successful prosecutions have

occurred during the past five years for

1394

[Thursday, 30 April 1981)39

breaches of regulations issued pursuant tothe Clean Air Act?

The answer is "None". If the stale of affairs is soextraordinarly satisfactory as that statisticindicates, one wonders whether a need exists at all[or a Clean Air Act. We all know anextraordinary and urgent need exists for theClean Air Act, but more importantly the Actshould have teeth and be enforced efficiently. TheGovernment decided that to improve the council'seffectiveness the number of members on it shouldbe increased, but already it has too manymembers on it. It will be made larger, and no realreason for that has been given. We have beengiven hope of benefits, bui no real reason for thechange.

The council is to have an additional member, arepresentative from the Confederation of WAIndustry. The member for Melville made it clear ,and nobody disputed the point, that most of thepollution around the place is caused by bigfactories. Usually at night they emit smoke fromtheir chineny stacks. They do not do so as muchduring the day because the public would see thepollution. The factories spew out an extraordinary-amount of billowing smoke. I passed through anarea just the other evening in which the stench ofpollution was unbearable. The place was in a fog.I had passed through the area a few days earlierin broad daylight, and there was no smoke at all,and it was not possible to believe that a factoryexisted therc.

An extraordinary need exists to watch veryclosely the activities of industry in connectionwith air pollution. Most certainly industry isentitled to a voice: we have not quite degeneratedto the stage where we would expect anythingotherwise. Let industry have a voice, but not anunnecessarily large voice. The voice of industry isto be increased so I imagine that in five years,time when the same questions are asked. theanswer to the first will be "Nil", and to thesecond "None". The Opposition just cannot sithere and allow this sort of action to beperpetrated and say nothing about it.

Mr Young: Would you not hope that was theanswer in five years' time?

Mr BERTRAM: No: I am giving a forecast, agreat deal of justification for which has beenavailable over the years. The shadow Minister forHealth who will be the Minister for Healthshortly, is protesting about this position becausethe people would expect him to protest. Theywould wonder what was wrong with theOpposition if it sat here mutely while thisproposition, with no evidence to justify it. was

being discussed. The Minister gave no evidence inhis remarks a moment ago to suggest chat thecontrol council is not up to standard. Theinference is that he thinks it is operating verywell. I am one member of the Opposition whodoes not think so. Nevertheless the Ministerbelieves it is operating efficiently, yet he is the onenow who is proposing an increase in itsmembership.

Mr Shalders: He is a far better judge than youare.

Mr BERTRAM: Presumably this is to make itmore efficient. With an increase in the number ona committee one usually inds it operates lessefficiently. We all know that. Some members ofParliament operate with a committee at electiontime and this is a first-class Method of beingunsuccessful. Members do not need a team ofcommittee members around them to tell themwhat to do. This is what we do in the interests ofour own advancement. This is the sort of thing W$eshould be thinking about in the interests, of thepreservation of clean air. As the member forMelville has pointed out so correctly, we shouldnot be "stacking the council". We do not want tostack it at all. What the Opposition wants isefficiency and I have the gravest doubt, from theevidence I have presented in the Chamber, thatwe do have an efficient council; and by increasingthe numbers once again it will be even lessefficient.

The Government, from time to time, pretends itis concerned about the interests of the people inthe country. It has been stated that therepresentation of local government on thiscommittee is protecting the interests of the ruralsector. It has come to my attention that this is notcorrect and that the LocalI GovernmentAssociation, as I understand the situation.represents only the metropolitan area. Therefore.,the country is certainly not represented throughlocal government. This seems to be anextraordinary change of attitude by thisGovernment, when we remember that onemoment it is concerned about giving countrypeople an advantage which in some circumstancesgives them a vote which has 17 times the value ofmy vote in the city, but when it comes to dealingwith air pollution those same country people donot get a vote at all. No-one in the so-calledNational Country Party-one of the coalitionparties-hinks about the situation. None of themprobably knows or cares. Anyhow, the Oppositiondoes know and does care, and hopes Somethingwill be done about it.

It would be more practical if country shireswere given a voice, than to give an extra seat on

1395

1 396 [ASSEM BLY]

this council to the Confederation of WesternAustralian Industry which already has sufficientvoice, and which point seems to be amplydemonstrated by the performance of thecommittee to date,

Thc commijttee really requires the Minister toget down to tin tucks and to give a proper,adequate, and responsible answer to the matterswhich have been raised by the shadow Ministerfor Health, because thus far the Minister forHeI alth has not given a proper answer at all.

Clause put and a division taken with thefollowing result-

Mr BlaikieSir Charles CourtMr CowanMr CoyneMrs CraigMr CraneDr DadourMr GraydenMr GrewarMr HassellMr Herz.feldM r P. V. Jones

Mr BertramnMr BridgeMr BryceMr B. T. BurkeMr T. J. BurkeMr CarrMr DaviesMr H. 1). EvansMr Grill

AyesMr LauraneMr RushtonMr SodemanMr MacKinnonMr MensarosMr Watt

Clause thus passed.

Ayes 23Mr McPharlinMr NanovieliMr O'ConnorMr OldM r Si bsonM r SpriggsMr Tret howanMr TubbyMr WVilliamsMr YoungMr Shalders

Noes 17M r Ha rmanaM r HodgeMr JamiesonMr MelverMr ParkerMr PearceM r TonikinMr Bateman

Pa irsNoes

Mr BarnecttM r E. T. Eva nsM rT. 1-1. JonesMr Skid inureMr WilsonMr Taylor

Clauses 6 to 9 put and passed.Clause tO: Section 20 amendedMr HODGEi: This clause seeks to alter the

composition of the scientific advisory committee.The committee will be increased in number fromeight to nine. The additional position to be addedseemns to me to be a worth-while and sensibleappointment because that person will be abiological or agricultural scientist, employed bythe Department of Agriculture. The Oppsition ishappy about the appointment.

The clause seeks to delete the description of afuel technologist and substitute it with adescription of a person who is a qualified engineeror industrial chemist:, and again, the Oppositionhas no objection to that alteration.

I note that the advisory committee also has anover-representation from The Confederation ofWestern Australian Industry (I nc.). Theconfederation has two representatives onl thecommittee and no other organisation has thatnumber, the other organisations being representedby one person. I see no logical reason for us topersevere with legislation which specifies chat twopersons shall represent the confederation.

The argument advanced by the Minister forHealth with respect to the representatives fromthe confederation does not hold and cannot beapplied to the scientific advisory committee. TheMinister said that four people were needed on thecouncil, to balance all points of view and torepresent all sections of industry. That argumentcannot be used with respect to the scientificadvisory committee. Surely the confederationcould be adequately represented by one scientificadviser on the Committee. Surely, they will nothave two scientific advisers, with differentopinions, to represent the confederation.

I note that the Trades and Labor Council is notrepresented at all and 1 make the same point Imade with respect to the Noise and VibrationControl Council: I believe it would be proper forthe Trades and Labor Council to be invited tohave a professionally qualified person to representit on the advisory committee.

I wish to point out to the Minister also thatthere is no representative of the Departmecnt ofConservation and Environment and I believe thatis a major oversight. The Minister said yesterday,by way of interjeetion, that the FederalIDepartment of Science and Environment wasrepresented on this committee. That may be so,but it is certainly not written into the legislation.It may be that one person on the committee justhappens to be an eniployee of that Federaldepartment. It is just good fortune for us thatperson is on the committee at present, but it iscertainly not a statutory requirement. I believethis oversight should be rectified because theState department most concerned with theenvironment is not represqented on this scientificadvisory committee.

I wish to advance the same commntns I madepreviously about the Noise and Vibration ControlCouncil and its advisory body. I am of the opinionthat this body should be amalgamated with thepai~cnt body. I believe the system of having atechnical advisory committee and an overridingcouncil is not the most efficient and streamlinedway of achieving our objective, which is to have aquiet, pollution-free environment. This could beachieved with the amalgamation of thoseorganisations.

1396

[Thursday. 30 April 1981] 19

Mr YOUNG: This clause will amend section20 which sets out the composition of the scientificadvisory committee. On reading the legislation,members will be aware that the appointments aircmade by the council: that is. the Air PollutionControl Council. and this clause sets out thepersons whom the council may appoint.

The member for Melville has made a numberof recommenda tions as to how the scientificadvisory council should be constituted. H-owever.the legislation itself quite clearly states that theAir Pollution Control Council shall make itsappointments from a certain number of people.

If the people referred to by the member forMelville wished to be represented on the scientificadvisory council then they wuuld have maderepresentations to mc requesting that thatcommittee be amended. The bodies to which thememiber referred are eminently responsible bodiesand if they felt they had ain obligation to berepresented on the committee they would havemade representtIions to me.

Mr Hodge:. That is putting the cart before thehorse.

Mr YOUNG: It is not because this Bill hasbeen before the Parliament for approximatelyseven or eight months. No body to whom themember for Melville has referred hascommunicated with me to state that anamendment should be made. The member forMelville did not communicate with me, at anytime prior to yesterday. requesting amendedrepresentation on this committee, nor did themember make any representation at the time Iwrote to himi req uest ing comiment i n respect of t helegislation. So. quite apart from those threeaspects one would think that any responsiblebody, which required representation, Would havemade a serious representation to me in the past.This Bill has been in existence for some Ime andI am not aware of any representation from anybody.

However. 1 will not say I disagree flatly andabsolutely with all the things the member forMelville has said. I am saying that as thoserepresentations were not Made to mc by thebodies referred to. they could hardly have beenconsidered by me. Therefore, as I said during thecourse of the debate on the Noise AbatementAmendment Bill with regard to ain appointmentthat he recommended to the Noise AbatementAdvisory Committee-in respect ofrepresentation from the IDepartment ofConservation and Environment. I think it was-Iwould consider such a representation when madeto me.

Mr Hodge: It was the Trades and LaborCouncil.

Mr YOUNG:. Yes, the Trades and LaiborCouncil. If such a body were to contact me tomake a case as to why it should be represented onthis particular committee. I would consider it.However, the member for Melville does not makea very strong ease wvhen he suggests I shouldamend the Bill to include representation fromorganisations which have made no submission tome about such representation.

Mr HODGE: I will reply briefly to theMiniister; certainly I am not satisfied with hisexplanation. Surely it is the Government'sresponsibility to ensure that these statutory bodiesarc properly composed. He is suggesting thatunless he receives an approach from anorganisation to be represented on a committee, hewould not consider such an appointment.

Mr Young: I am saying I consider thecommittee to be constituted properly. You aresaying otherwise, and I am saying that thosepeople never put a ease to me.

Mr HODGE: I eannot believe that the Ministeris saying he is quite satisfied that the StateDepartment of Conservation and Environment isnot on the advisory committee of the clean aircouncil.

Mr Young: I do niot think it the end of theworld that it is not.

Mr HODGE: That is a staggering admission. Itis perfectly obvious to everyone except theMinister for Health that the State Department ofConservation and Environment should berepresented on this committee. That is a glaringoversight. The Minister has fallen down on hisJob, and he is now casting around and trying toblame me or anyone else for not drawing up hislegislation for him.

I have learnt my lesson. I will not in futureplace my proposed amendments to a Bill on thenotice paper for this Minister. How naive I was togive him forward advice on the Noise AbatementBill, Any amendments suggested by theOpposition arc thrown out just as easily whetheror not they arc placed on the notice paper.

Mr Young: I gave you 12 days' notice of thefact that they did not make sense.

Mr HODGE: The Minister did not respond tomy complaint about the overrepresentation oF theConfederation of Western Australian Industry. Apoint in regard to the composition of the councilitself is the fact that there is provision for anappointment from the University of WesternAustralia and no other tertiary organisat ion. My

1397

1398 ASSEMBLY]

comments apply also to this appointment. Weshould be able to look for possible appointmentsfrom other tertiary institutions. It may well bethat art eminent, highly-qualified person in theseareas is on the staff of Murdoch University or ofthe Western Australian Institute of Technology.We should not exclude such a person from thecouncil.

Clause put and passed.Clause I I put and passed,Clause 12: Section 24 amended-Mr HODGE: This clause seeks to amend

section 24 of the principal Act by deletingparagraph (b) of subsection (4) and replacing itwith a new paragraph. The Opposition approvesof this amendment; it is a very sensible one whichwill give the clean air council much moreflexibility in policing the Act. The'amendmentwill give the council the power to revoke a licenceor to suspend it for any period not exceeding sixmonths if it thinks fit. It can revoke or vary anycondition attaching to a licence, and it can attachnew conditions to a licence. Apparently somedoubt existed in regard to this power in the oldlegislation, so it appears to be a very good move toamend it in this way,

I raised a point briefly during my secondreading speech, and I hope the Minister has hadtime to look at it. 1 will quickly recapitulate myremarks. The Bill does not propose to amendparagraph (a) which uses the wurds "the Councilshall grant any application for a licence orrenewal or transfer", and as the word "may" is tobe used in the new paragraph (b), it seems to methat the word "may" should be substituted for theword "shall" in paragraph (b) to be consistentand to avoid any possibility of conflict. I believethere is a possibility [or confusion because of theinconsistency and there may be a legal challengein the future. I would like to know whether theMinister can clear up that point.

Mr YOUNG: On the surface the point raisedby the member for Melville appears to be valid,but when we look closely at the wording ofparagraphs (a) and (b) as they will be constituted,we find it appears that no problem will exist as aresult of retaining the word 'shall" in subsection(4) rather than substituting the word "may". Theintention of the legislation was that on applicationfor a licence for scheduled premises, the councilwas to make a grant, and that the grant could besubject to conditions that may be made by thecouncil. So the word "shall" was written into thatparagraph advisedly.

The member for Melville raised the point thatwhen new paragraph (b) comes into force it

means that the council may do certain things.Those things will be to revoke, vary, or applyconditions to a licence, and the member forMelville suggests that will be in conflict with theword "shall" in subsection (4). I think he bestdescribed his fears by saying that if a licence wererevoked, the company or individual against whomthe licence was revoked, could simply return tothe council and say "I want another licence"That is quite correct, but the situation is highlyunlikely to arise for the reasons that I willenunciate to the committee. Also, it would serveabsolutely no purpose for someone to take suchaction.

If one happens to be a polluter of the air, onewould be looking for the lesser of the twoevils-the two evils being the revocation or thesuspension of a licence. If the council decided torevoke a licence, as the member for Melville saysquite rightly, the person concerned could comeback to the council to say that he Wanted anotherlicence. Of course the licence would be subject tonew conditions written into it, and this would beone method by which the council could say"Okay, we will give you another chance if youlike". However, the person concerned would haveto wail up to a month, plus the time necessary forthe procedures involved to be followed. So theperson would be in default of the Act for aconsiderable time and the revocation of a licencewould put the person who has committed someform of transgression against the Act into a verydifficult position. It would not be very sensible forsuch a person to proceed without rectifying theconditions that gave rise to the originalrevoca tion.

As I pointed out, the new conditions would bewritten in immediately and if the person was indefault of them he would be well and truly out ofpocket as a result.

Mr Hodge: Would it not be preferable not toissue that licence instead of issuing it and thenattaching conditions to it?

Mr YOUNG: Do you mean the second licence?Mr Hodge: Yes.Mr YOUNG: I really cannot see any reason

that no license should issue, because theconditions imposed on the second licenceobviously would be those which the council wouldwant spelt out in any event. The idea of the Act isnot to put people out of business, but to ensurethat they comply with the requirements of theAct. I do not see any advantage would be gainedby a person returning immediately to the counciland saying "Give me another licence." On theother hand, a suspension would be even worse

1398

[Thursday, 30 April 19811 19

than revocation if that power is contained inparagraph (b) for at licence to be suspended [or upto six months: and if a person transgressed thesuspension of a licence he % ould be liable for atremendous amnount of money on a daily basis.

Although the point made by the membcr forMelville is correct in that on the surface itappears a person can overcome the provisions ofthis section by asking for another licence, firstly.that person would be liable for a daily penaltyuntil such time as the council was in a position togrant at new licence: and, secondly. the newlicence certainly would contain conditions whichthe council would want to impose on it, andfailure to comply with those conditions obviouslywould cost the person in transgression aconsiderable amount of mioney.

If the word "may" were written into the Billt he councilI woulId be able to sit back a nd decide togo against the original intention of theGovernment and the Cabinet at the time the Actwas drafted. The original intention was that thelicence would be issued and people would not beheld up by the council saying "We will thinkabout it." In other words, the licence is issued,subject to certain conditions which the councilmay want to impose from time to tim, -as anencouragemenit to get on with the job.

Mr I-ODGE: I appreciate the Ministei sdetailed explanation. I still do not agree with him.but I will not make an issue of it.

I believe the word "may" would give thecouncil more flexibility. Circumstances couldartse in which a person continually offendsagainst the Clean Air Act, and it scems to methat instead of going through the procedure ofreissuing a licence to such a severe offender itwould be better if the council had the authority todecline to issue him a licence. I cannot imaginethe council being so irresponsible or negative as torefuse to grani a licence to a person without verygood reason, or being excessively tardy in issuinga licence. If the council did that the Ministerwould have grounds for taking action against it.Rather than going through the procedure ofgranting a new licence to a person whose licencehas been revoked it may be preferable in someinstances for the Council to say "'We will not eiVeyou at licence." I believe that would add a littlemore flexibility to the legislation.

Clause put and passed.Clause 13: Section 26 amnended-Mr H-ODGE: The Opposition objects in

principle to this amendment. It is a minor one toadd the words "Minister or the" to section 26(2).1However. it touches on the matter we debated

yesterday in respect of providing an alternativeavenue of appeal to the Minister for Hecalthrather than continuing with the sole avenue ofappeal to the Local Court. Under this amendmentpeople may appeal against decisions of the councileither to the Minister or to the court.

This amendment is not worthy of a long debate,but it is the first amendment which introduces theproposition of an appeal to the Minister, and weare strongly opposed to that. Therefore, We areopposed to the clause.

Mr YOUNG: Perhaps by interjection themember for Melville could tell me whether thewhole argument on the matter of the appeal to theMinister could be confined to this clause.

Mr H-odge: We can argue it on this clause orclause 23.

Mr YOUNG; I would prefer this one.Mr Hodge: All right.Mr YOUNG- I thank the member for Melville

for not repeating the debate of yesterday. and it isnot my intention to repeat it, either, other than toreiterate that there seems to be generalacceptance of the fact that under other ActsMinisters are appealed to on matters similar tothat dealt with in this Act. I know the m-ember forMelville has expressed the Opposition's view inrespect of this matter. The Opposition feels it isbad, but there -are many reasonIs that such anappeal should be provided, even under the HealthAct.

Perhaps it seems strange that a Minister can beappealed to and override the opinion or directionof the commissioner who is a qualified man inrespect of public health matters. However. Ievidence the fact that the Minister for LocalGovernment makes decisions in respect oftechnical matters such as those which theMinister for Health would deal with in an appealunder this Act.

I made all the points that I care to make inrespect of this matter yesterday in reply to arather longer submission by the member forMelville.

Mr HODGE I did not go into a great deal ofdetail because I intended to speak to this matteron clause 23. H~owever, it is the same argumentand the matter can be debated on clause 23 orclause 1 3. 1 will reiterate briefly the points madeby the Opposition yesterday in ease anyone isunder the impression that our opposition to thismeaSUTe may have waned since then.

It is most improper to provide this avenue ofappeal to the Minister for Health against thedecisions of the council. As I said yesterday. the

1399

1400 [ASSEMBLY]

Minister for Health, under this Statute, has veryclose day-to-day links with the administration ofthe legislation and the council. I quoted yesterdaythe numerous provisions in the legislation givingthe Minister power to appoint people to thecouncil, power to sack people, and power to askthe council to do things and to give him advice.He can convene meetings of the council he can doall sorts of things. It is improper For a Minister,who is very close to the operation of a council, tosit in judgmcnt on the decisions of that council.

The Minister for Health quoted the Ministerfor Local Government as a similar avenue ofappeal against decisions of local authorities. Thatis not a good argument. I do not approve of herdoing that. The Opposition has said on a numberof occasions that it is our intention, when webecome the Government, to reduce drastically thenumber of occasions on which the Minister forLocal Government can act in that capacity.

The Minister for Health instanced the powergiven to him under the Health Act to override theCommissioner of Public Health on some technicalmatters. Again, that is unsatisfactory. I hope hewould not be exercising those powers except invery extraordinary circumstances.

What we are legislating for now is notsomething confined to very rare or extraordinarycireumstanes. It could become quite a routinematter. The Minister has not put up anyargument in favour of the change. He has notadvanced one jot of argument as in what is wrongwith appealing to the Local Court.

As far as I am concerned, and as far as theOpposition is concerned, the present arrangementis satisfactory. We have confidence in the LocalCourt to deal with these matters. We do not haveconfidence in the Minister for Health-thisMinister for Health, or any other Minister forH-ealth. If I were the Minister for Health,certainly I wouid not want to have thatresponsibility. It is not proper for a political headof a department to have that sort of rcsponsibility.sitting in that kind of judicial position.

Mr BERTRAM: This is a thoroughlyunacceptable provision. It reeks of mischief. It is athoroughly unsatisfactory one; and I support althat the shadow Minister for Health has said. Iwill repeat one or two of the points he has made,because they bear repeating, and they should berepeated. 1 do not expect we will achieve anythingwith the vote:, but that does not mean we are notright. Thai only highlights the inadequacy andthe inefficiency of this Committee, and the peoplein it.

The member for Melville pointed out, as heought to point out, that no ease has been made toshow that the present arrangements under the Actare not satisfactory-chat any person who isaggrieved may appeal to the Local Court. Thereis no evidence before this Committee to suggestthat that system, as it is now operating, is notoperating satisfactorily and adequately. It is inthat context that the Minister now comes alongand says "I am going to arrange through this Bill,by this amendment, to give to aggrieved personsan alternative avenue of appeal"-that is to say,that henceforth, instead of being entitled toappeal to a magistrate of the Local Court only, anappellant can go to t he Minister.

The other most objectionable aspect of this isthat when there is an appeal to the Local Court,at least there is some prospect of publicity beinggiven to the appeal and to the proceedings in thecourt. Of course, the Press may exert its powers ofcensorship and decline to publish the proceedings.We have no control over that.

The Press virtually has an absolute power ofcensorship. It takes great exception to censorshipby anybody else:, but it is thoroughly happy withcensorship by itself and of itself.

In any event, if this clause is passed, it will noteven be within the power of the Press to censor orto publish, because it will all be secret. The publicwill not have the faintest idea of what is going on,or why it is going on. Whilst that might have beena satisfactory arrangement a few decades ago, itis certainly not satisfactory to the ordinarymember of the public today. The public believethat where the full light of day shines uponproceedings, and there is plenty of daylightshining on the activities of mankind, and plenty ofpublicity, there is a greater chance of a betterstandard of performance.

Now, we might not like lots of things that go onin the United States of America. For one, I donot. However, one has to concede that in theUnited States plenty of publicity is given to lots ofthings-far more publicity than is given in oursociety.

Amongst other things, this provision has apotential to favour appellants-give them a betterrun than they should have. Clearly it is going tohide appeal proceedings so that the public will nothave the faintest idea of who is appealing againstwhat. People will not know What went on at anappeal. They will not have the faintest idea of theoutcome of the appeal, either. The public shouldhave knowledge of all of those things.

There are lots of other things one couldsaabout this clause, but one does not need to. If the

1400

IThursday. 30 April 1981]140

argument put before the Committee by theshadow Minister for Health and by myself is notadequate to carry the day, nothing else will carrythe day.

We know what the Government will do aboutit-absolutely nothing at all. It will railroad thisthrough, unsatisfactorily, against the publicinterest-not caring. It is being done because ofthe sponsorship and the urging of the people inthe Liberal Party upon the Government- nobodyelse. It is not an initiative merely of the Ministersitting there, with all the jobs he has to do. He didnot suddenly turn up this Act and say, "I willalter the appeal.'" What nonsense!

Somebody within the portals of power has toldthe Minister, "This is what we want." He is doingas he is told. It is important that we acknowledgethis is happening, when we have performances ofthis sort-'mal-performanices", one should say.One has to look for the reasons. Odd situationscall for odd origins, or usually spring from oddorigins. That is what has happened here.Somebody has applied the pressure to theGovernment and to the Minister: and he is bowingto their directions, notwithstanding the caseagainst it is overwhelming.

I do not propose to labour the point any more.

For the reasons I have given, we must inevitablyoppose this provision, which is absolutely beyondjustification, thoroughly bad,. obnoxious,mischievous, and has nothing good about itwhatsoever.

Clause put andfollowing result-

Mr BlaikieSir Charles CourtM r CowanMr CoyneMrs CraigMr CraneDr DadourMr GrewarMr HassellMr HerzfeldMr P V. JonesMr MePh'arlin

Mr BarnettMr BertramMr BryceNit B. TV. BurkeM rT. J. BurkeMr CarrMrr DaviesMr H. D. EvansMr Harmnan

AyesMr LauranceM r RushtonM r SodenianMr MaclinnonMr MeISarosMr Grayden

PairsNoes

M'vr E. T. EvansMklr T, H. JonesM10r SkidmoreMr GrillMr TaylorMr Bridge

Clause thus passed.Clauses 14 to 17 put and passed.Clause 18: Section 37 a mended-Mr HODGE: This clause seeks to amend

section 37 of the principal Act. The Bill seeks toprohibit the occupier of an unscheduled premisesfrom emitting smoke from a chimney or open fire.Such a provision closes a loophole which existedand formerly allowed the occupier of anunscheduled premises to emit smoke from an openfire. The occupier was prohibited from emittingsmoke from a chimney, but not from an open fire.I am pleased to see that loophole has been closed.

During the second reading debate I mentionedbriefly that it seemed to mec section 32 of theparent Act may have also required a similaramendment. Thai section deals With the emissionof smoke from a chimney oF a scheduled premises.It seems to me it may be necessary to amendsection 32 and to insert the words "or an openfire', so that the same sort of safeguard will beprovided.

It would be rather ludicrous to prohibit anunscheduled premiscs from emitting smoke froma chimney or open fire, but to allow a scheduledpremises to emit smoke from an open fire, but notfrom a chimney.

a division taken with the I raise that matter briefly in the hope that theMinister will look at it and discuss it with his

Ayes 24 advisers. I leave it at that, in the hope that theMr Naniovich M inister can provide an explanation.M r O'Connor Mr YOUNG: Very briefly. I should like to tellMr Old temme o evleIwl ee i onciM rSi bsonthmebrfrMlil wilrfrhscmnsM r Spriggs to the Air Pollution Control Council. We areMr Stephens talking about the Act and it would appear that, atMr Trethowan the moment, section 37 contains the power toMr Tubby prohibit the emission of smoke from any or all.Mr WaitMr Williams premises;, but subsection (4) specifically precludesMir Young scheduled premises. Therefore, the aspects raisedM rShalders by the member for Melville will be given close

Noes 17 (Tdklr) attention by the Air Pollution Control Council.

Mr Hodge Clause put and passed.MriJamieson Clauses 19 to 22 put and passed.M1r Mclver Cas 3 eto 5aeddMr ParkerClue2-Seto45a nd -Mr Pearce The CHAIRMAN: In line 27 the word '"arc'Mr Tonkin has been omitted. I am sure the Committee wouldMr WilsonMr Bateman be prepared to accept such an error in Lhe same

(Tel ler) way as it is prepared to accept typographical

1401

102[ASSEMBLY]

errors. In that case, I propose that we insert theword "are" after the word "relates" on page I Iand, therefore, the motion before the Chair is thatclause 23, as corrected, be agreed to.

Mr HODGE: This is the clause which amendssection 45 of the parent Act and provides theframework for the new avenue of appeal to theMinister. I will not repeat the arguments we havecanvassed already. We are opposed to this clause,because we do not believe there should be anavenue of appeal to the Minister. Had thatdecision not been mnade by the Government, thisamendment would not be necessary. because thatis what it provides for. For that reason, we opposethis clause.

Clause, as correc ted, put and a division takenwith the following result-

Mr BlaikieSir Charles CourtMr CowanMr CoyneMrs CraigMr CraneDr ladourMr GrewarMr H1assellMr HerzfeldM r P. V. JonesMr MePharlin

Mr BarnettMr BertramMr BryceMr B. T. BurkeMr T. J. BurkeMr CarrMr DaviesMr H. D). EvansMr H-arman

Ayes 24Mr NanovichMr O'ConnorMr Old"MrSi bsonM r SpriggsMr StephensM r Tret howanMr TubbyMr WaitMr WilliamsMr YoungM r Shalders

Noes 17Mr HodgeM r JarnmiesonMr MctverMr ParkerM r Pea rceMr TonkinMr WilsonMr Bateman

PairsAyes Noes

Mr Laurance M r E. T. EvansMr Rushton Mr T. H-1 JonesMr Sodeman Mr SkidnmoreMr MacKinnon Mr GritiMr Mensaros Mr TaylorMr Graydcn Mr Bridge

Clause, as corrected, thus passed.The CHAIRMAN: I ask the member for

Ascot, as he crosses the Chamber in front of theChair, to pay the normal courtesies that exist. Iknow he did not on a previous occasion.

Mr Bryce: The Chairman of the Committeemight wvell ask, but whether a member complies Isuip to the mnember. Don't take yourself so,seriously!

Several members interjected.The CHIAIRMAN: Order! I inform the House

I niade that remark because the meniber in

company with others had not paid on a previousoccasion the normal courtesies to the Chair. Mostmembers follow the courtesies of the House.

Clauses 24 to 28 put and passed.Title put and passed.Bill reported, without amendment, but with

corrections.Sitting suspended from 12.42 to 2. 15 pa.

INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATIONAMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 2 April.MR PARKER (Fremantle) 12.15 p.m.j: At the

outset I state that the Opposition is stronglyopposed to this piece of legislation. It is yetanother attempt by the Government to remove agroup of workers from within the confines of thejurisdiction oF the Industrial ArbitrationCommission of Western Australia.

Last year we saw another amendment to theAct; indeed, it was an amendment to a sectionwhich had a similar effect; namely, to removegroups of workers from the control of theIndustrial Arbitration Commission thereforeremoving the ability to resolve disputes throughthe commission.

That legislation was very much a result of anindustrial dispute in which the Government wasinvolved with its officers and departments.However, the Government found it was on thelosing end and, because it was not able to win inthe industrial arena, it decided to bring the matterto the place where it would win; namely, theLegislative Assembly in the Parliament ofWestern Australia where it has the numbers.

Now, we find ourselves in the same situationwith legislation to amend section 96 of theIndustrial Arbitration Act. The Governmentundertook action with respect to the prisonofficers and the Prisons Officers' Union ofWorkers and it decided to reclarify the matter ina certain way. The Government thought it coulddo that in a fairly simple procedure. However, theIndustrial Arbitration Commission said theGovernment did not have the power to do what itwished so the Government brought the matter tothis Parliament.

This is a tactic of the Government and itdisplays its arrogance in that it does not believethe machinery it has set up to deal with industrialdisputes is sufficiently trustworthy so, the matteris brought to this place because the Government isnot prepared to accept the umpire's decision.

1402

[Thursday. 30 April 19811 40

One feels somewhat strange in dealing with thislegislation today-important though itis-because on the basis of what I heard on theradio at lunch time of what is happening in t heFederal Parliament. it seems that it is like thesynod of the Russian church discussing the finerythat should be worn during the time of the start ofthe Bolshevik revolution. It is a pity because withthat happening, what is occurring here will looksomewhat pale and insignificant. What is beingattempted here is important and it is necessarythat the public have an understanding of thereasons behind the Government's actions in thismatter.

The Government started thinking of this actionfollowing a disputein the Fremnantle Prison on 13August 1979. The dispute arose because prisonerswere wandering around carrying their personaleffects in cardboard containers. The prisonofficers requested that the containers bewithdrawn as they posed a security threat becausethey could not be properly searched. Prior to thismatter there had been considerable public alarmabout the number of escapes from FremantlePrison.

Mr Davies: More out than in.Mr PARKER: I think one of the prisons has

the unfavourable reputation of having moreescapes in one year than prisoners inside,

On 14 August 1979 a conference between thePrison Officers' Union and the Department ofCorrections failed to resolve the dispute. Thedepartment acknowledged that the boxes posed asecurity threat, but was not prepared to authorisetheir removal, despite the fact that the prisonofficers felt they posed a security threat. Therecommendations of the prison officers, who hadexpressed a genuine concern about security, wasoverridden.

The members of the Prison Officers' Unionwere not prepared to continue to work under suchconditions, because they felt the precautions wereinsufficient for themselves, and insecure so far asthe public were concerned. Later that day theprison officers removed the cardboard boxes fromthe prisoners and as a consequence a number ofprison officers who supervised the removal werecharged under prison regulations.

On 15 August, the following day, thedepartment ordered the principal officer at theprison to distribute plastic containers to personsthroughout the prison. The principal officerrefused, and was charged with refusing to fulfil alawful order under the same prison regulation.Two other prison officers were given the sameorder, they refused. and were subsequently

charged, on Thursday, 16 August 1979. forrefusing to obey a lawful order.

A meeting of prison officers was held at8.00 am. to discuss what -action could be taken asa result of the charges being laid against theofficers concered. During the course of thatmeeting, certain officers left on duty as part ofthe skeleton staff were re'lieved of their positionsby administrative officers. It is important tounderstand that point because one of the chargesmade against these men was that they wereirresponsible for leaving the prison unattended.That is not the case.

The principal officers and other wardens wereanxious that prison security was not threatenedand so a skeleton staff was left on duty. Despitethat, administrative officers of the departmentdecided to come to relieve them of their duties. Soit is not true to say. as has been alleged often inthe Press, that these officers were beingtransferred because they would not accept thevery grave security responsibilities that go withtheir positions. In fact, they were taking theaction they did take precisely because of theirconcern about their own security. their ownworking conditions, and indeed, the security ofthe public.

I recall being told at the time about Oneprisoner who was walking around with hiscardboard box containing a valid Australianpassport, a knife, and various other implements.Apparently this prisoner had some idea that hewould not be staying in the prison very long, andhe made sure his passport was up to date-he wascarrying it with him at all times just to be on thesafe side. It is not surprising that the prisonofficers were concerned at the level of security inthe prison.

When these wardens were relieved of theirduties by the administrative Officers, on makinginquiries it was found that the officers had beenlocked out of the prison by the prisonadministration. Some two hours after the lockout.a further meeting of officers took place just insidethe prison. Officers were allowed in the first partof' the prison, but they were not permitted to havekeys.

At that meeting the director of the department(Mr Kidston) informed the officers at the meetingof the decision to transfer principal officers to theCivil Service. It is important that that sequence ofevents be noted. As I will reveal later when Icome to refer to the decision of the IndustrialCommission, that statement conflicts to someconsiderable degree with the evidenee which the

1403

1404 ASSEM BLY]

department put before the Industrial Commissionwith regard to tlie sequence of events.

On the following day, Friday, 17 August 1979,the dispute over the containers virtually endedwhen the prison officers, and the departmentagreed that the mnost appropriate way to handlethe matter of prisoners wanting to carry geararound and prison officers being concernedthat solid containers would enable offensiveweapons and other things to be secreted in themwats to distribute clear plastic bags to theprisoners to carry their gear. Originally tieofficers had taken the position that they did notwant prisoners to be carrying things around theprison at all. However, rather reluctantly theyaccepted the position they were put in by thedepartment.

Obviously the department was not going tocontrol the prisoners;, the representatives of thedepartment suggested to the prison officers thatthe prisoners would riot if sonic form of containerwas not made available to carry their gear aroundthe prison.

On that same day, Friday, 17 August. all theprincipal officers were informed that they hadbeen transferred froni the employment of thedepartment to the enmployment of the PublicService Board, and that they were eligible tobecome members of the Civil Service Association.The following week the Prison Officers' Uniontook out a prerogative writ in the Supreme Courtagainst the then Chief Secretary claiming thatemployees could not be transferred to anotheremployer without their consent. Prior to the writsbeing heard in the Supreme Court, the letter ofappointment to the Civil Service Association was"'it hdrawn,

This is another example of the ineptness of theGovernment or its advisers in dealing with suchsituations. Obviously the Government was advisedthat it could take certain action: namely, theaction of transferring people from one employerto another. Obviously, once the Governmentsought the advice of the Crown LawDeparnient-or whomever it turned to foradvice-i am sure the Government was informedvery quickly that the action it intended to takewats beyond the bounds of possibility. Again wesee the Government taking action only to discoverlater that it does not have the ability to do so.Then the Government has to rush aroundhurriedly or seek to change its tactics or evenintroduce legislation to meet the situation it hascreated. That is precisely the reason we have thisBill before uis today.

So the instruction to the principal officers waswithdrawn prior to the hearing of the prerogativewrit, and the principal officers were "invited" toapply for positions of chief officers in the PublicService. These men were not forced to becomechief officers, although the department told themthat it could not guarantee they would not bedemnoted from principal officers or dismissed fromtheir positions if they decided not to apply tobecome chief officers.

The principal officers were told that if they didnot apply for the positions of chief officers within24 hours of being given the offer, they could notsubsequently be guaranteed those or similarpositions in the Public Service.

Needless to say. with terms like that-that sortof bludgeoning of the principal offrice rs-moust ofthe men accepted the positions of chief officers,and one can hardly be surprised at that. However,some refused to be so bludgeoned, and as a resultof conferences between the parties, and laterbefore the Industrial Commission, it was agreedthat principal officers who had not, at that stage,elected to become chief officers, should not berequired to make a decision until after theIndustrial Commission had considered thedispute.

Numerous conferences took place on thequestion of this dispute before the IndustrialComnmission. In those conferences the unionargued that it was not the province of theGovernment to decide to which union a group ofemployees would belong. The whole purpose ofthe exercise had been to remove the prisonofficers from the area of membership of thePrison Officers' Union. and to put them into thearea of membership of the Civil ServiceAssociation, apparently in the belief that thiswould have some effect on their industrialbehaviour.

One can only ask whether that will be the case.It is by no means certain that the principalofficers will change their opinion as to whataction they should be involved in, simply becausethey belong to a different union. The Governmenttakes a very simplistic view of industrial relations;it takes the view that the question of which unionone belongs to is much more important than one'sown view, and that certain unions are likely to actin certain ways and others arc not.

The list of unions the Government regards asmilitant continues to grow and grow, as more andmore workers-particularly those employed bythe Governrnent-decide they are fed up with theway the Government handles its industrialrelations policy or the way in which the

1404

[Thursday. 30 April 1981110

Governments. Federal or State, try to force thearbitration commissions, Federal or State. tohandle industrial policy. More and more groups ofworkers are attempting to take action, includingmany who hitherto have never resorted to thistype of action.

Instead of looking at the reasons behind theaction and instead of trying to sort out theproblem and recognise that more than anybody inthe administrative section of the Department ofCorrections. the prison officers-particularly thesentor officers-are the people most concernedabout security and in fact have constantly told thedepartment its security is inadequate and sonic ofthe decisions made in respect of the security oflong-term prisoners is quite ludicrous, theGovernment thinks that by simply changing thename, classification, and status of these officers,and changing the union which it thinks thoseprison officers should belong to. it will solve theproblem. That shows the sheer ineptitude of theGovernment in the field of industrial relations.

The Government does not understand whatindustrial relations are all about. The Governmenthas a reaction to unions which is not unlike thereaction of Count Dracula to the crucifix. andalmost as dramatic. The Government believes thisis the way in which it can sort out this problem. Itneeds only to look at the way in which the CivilService Association, for the First time in itshistory. has taken action against the Governmentas its employer to see that this position is veryunlikely to remain the case for very long.

In the conference before the commission, theunion argued that the Industrial Commissionhad been established to prevent and settle disputesand if there were disputes between the union andits members and the Department of Corrections,the proper place for sorting out those disputes wasin the Industrial Commission, using the variousmechanisms, and not by unilateral action on thepart of the Government by transferring employeesor-as at the moment-by legislative action ininststing certain things happened, even thoughnobody wanted them to happen.

After nearly three days in conference, it wasagreed the commission should have theopportunity to recommend whether principalofficers should remain as principal officers underministerial employment, or whether they shouldbecome civil servants, in the Public Service. ThePublic Service advocates indicated theGovernment would place argument before thecommission that it would not necessarily be boundby any recommendation of the commission. Once,again, this shows the hypocrisy of theGovernment in regard to industrial relations. We

hear the Government, and particularly thisMinister, talking about accepting the umpire'sdecision. The Minister himself has used theexpression "fair go" more than a few times in thisChamber and in his public statements anddealings with people in the industrial field.Despite that apparent support of the philosophyof a fair go and of accepting the umpire'sdecision, the real position of the Government isthat if it does not get its own way in terms of theestablished mechanism, it will take some otheropportunity to get its own way.

In order to facilitate the inquiry by thecommission into the legal position, it was agreedthe Department of Corrections would makeapplication to delete fromt the prison officers'award the classification of "principal officer".The hearing was delayed due to another matterbefore the commission, but it finally went beforethen Senior Commissioner Kelly. now the ChiefIndustrial Commissioner, on 27 March last year.The Public Service Board, representing theMinister, indicated that the department had givenconsideration to transferring principal officers tothe Public Service well before the August 1979dispute. However, it had not acted upon thematter before the dispute arose.

The argument which the Government put to thecommission was that the Government. and not theIndustrial Commission, had the power to createpositions under the Public Service Act and ofremoving like positions from ministerialemployment. The Government advocated that thecommission should not involve itself in suchactivities. The Government also said it wasprepared to argue that chief officers wereGovernment officers, although at the time, theGovernment advocate did not so argue.

Some weeks after that, Senior CommissionerKelly called the parties together to makesubmissions as to whether the new classificationswere in fact Government officers under the thenexisting provisions of section 96 of the IndustrialArbitration Act. The commission handed down itsdecision on I I July in which it was concludedthey were Government officers. However, nodecision or recommendation "'as made as towhether the position of "principal officer" shouldcontinue. Senior Commissioner Kelly refused todelete from the prison officers' award theclassification "principal officer"

I believe it is worth referring to the decision,because Senior Commissioner Kelly made somevery valuable comments. The following statementappears on page 9 of the decision-

1405

1406 [ASSEMBLY]

From the evidence of those witnesses it isclear that any difference between their dutiesas Chief Officers and thcir dutics asPrincipal Officers. wvas a paper differenceonly and was, in any event, insignificant.Indeed, on the case as a whole, the onlyconclusion which one could reasonably drawis that the way in which the Public ServiceBoard and the Director of the Departmentsaw the administration of the Departmentbeing strengthened by the Principal Officersbeing appointed Chief Officers under thePublic Service Act was that they wouldthereby be removed front the Prison OfficersUnion and would be subject to direction andcontrol under the Public Service Act.

In other words, the commissioner's decisionignored all the nonsense of administrative changesbeing necessary to effect this decision. Thecommissioner brought it down to the nub.' Despitethe fact these officers had exhibited an extremelyresponsible attitude towards industrial relations;despite the fact that they, more than anybody inthe department, were concerned aboutdepartmental security, about their own securityand about public security in regard to prisons;,despite the fact the Government was ignoring theviews of these officers, the department thought itsproblems could be solved by transferring thesegroups of workers from one union to anotherunion and fromt one type of employment toanother.

Subsequent to that decision, the union filed anapplication to cover chief officers and the answersfrom the Public Service Board were filed on 14October 1980. On 16 October, the unioncontacted the Public Service Board and inquiredwhether it had any objections to an award forchief officers. The advocate receiving the callindicated that he would check the position withhis senior officer and advise the union in duecourse.

The reason for this activity was contrary towhat the Government thought was the position. Itsuddenly discovered it could not force thesepeople to become members of the Civil ServiceAssociation. It found these people were eligible tobe members of that association in so far as theclassification of Government officers wasconcerned, but because of the way in wvhichsection 96(l) of the Act read, they were alsoeligible to become members of the PrisonOfficers' Union.

That meant the Prison Officers' Union waseligible to serve a log of claims on the Departmentof Corrections, or the Public Service Board, as the

employer, seeking to have those workers coveredby an award.

Whether the commission would have grantedsuch an award, whether it would have decided itwas better for the workers to be covered the wayof other people employed under the Public ServiceAct are covered, is something that was, and still isuntil the passage of this Act, the province of theIndustrial Commission to decide. The mereserving of a log of claims on an employer and allthe various other formalities does not then requirethe IIndustrial Commission, whether it ishappening in a State or Federal jurisdiction, to goahead and make an award with respect to thosegroups of employees. It is within the competenceof the parties to the proceeding-including theemployers and the unions, although they wouldnot be expected to make such decisions, and anyother party such as the Attorney General onbehalf of the Government-to argue that thediscretion of the commission ought to be exercisedin a way which would prevent the making of suchan award. That is not something which is unusual;it is not something which has never happenedbefore. For example, I recall that during the timeI was on the Senate of the University of WesternAustralia a Federal union made application for alog of claims covering all workers inuniversities-all non-academic workers includingregistrars and various other very senioradministrative officers. The vice-chancellor'scommittee decided that whilst it was prepared tohave an award for general administrative staff itthought it would be highly inappropriate forpeople such as registrars, deputy registrars, andassistant registrars to be covered by an award ofthe same type and essentially binding both themand people of whom in many respects they werethe employers-they were not legally theemployers but they had similar rights in regard tohiring and firing. The university made asubmission to the Federal commission for thatcommission to refuse to make an award withrespect to those senior administrativeclassifications.

The commission agreed to that submission butin this instance, as one would expect of thisGovernment, we had a Government which wasnot prepared to take a chance and not prepared torisk the merits of its argument and put thembefore public scrutiny. The Government hasinsisted with this legislation in having its own waywith the result that the matter has not been left tothe Industrial Commission. Despite the fact thematter was before the commission and despite thefact the application came on for hearing on 3March, the Government obviously hurriedly

1406

(Thursday, 30 April 19811 40

introduced this legislation. In fact, variousdelaying tactics were used in the commission bythe Government's agents in this matter to ensurethat time would be given before a decision wasmade so that this legislation could be passed. Ibelieve that once this legislation is passed theGovernment will go back to the commission andsay "Sorry, you have no jurisdiction in thismatter. The Parliament has amended section96(l1) of the Industrial Arbitration Act."

In order to get the ime it nceded, theGovernment went through the farce of asking thatthe matter be referred to the Industrial AppealsCourt, although it never sought to appeal thedecision made by Senior Commissioner Kelly. Ifthe Government felt there was something legallywrong with what Senior Commissioner Kelly did,the other thing it could have done wats to appealhis decision to the Industrial Appeals Court-, butonce again it did not take that action for somereason or other.

As I understand it. what the Government isseeking to do by amending section 96(l) is tomake it clear that a person who is employed as anofficer under or within the meaning of the PublicService Act is a Government officer. Now theway the Act reads at the moment, the words "whois eligible to become a member of the association"refer to the whole of the subsection. The way theGovernment intends to amend this section willmean that each individual subsection stands on itsown and each individual group of workers will beeligible to become members of the Civil ServiceAssociation only. I do not know that theGovernment has told the Civil Service Associationthat if it does not amend its rules to cover theclassification of "General Officer" in the prisonsservice the Government will open UP the Positionso that other clerical unions also can recruit andoperate within the Public Service area. Needlessto say the Civil Service will, with some alacrity,ensure its rules are amended to allow chiefofficers to come in. It shows the bludgeoningattitude this Government adopts in terms of theway in which it deals with its own employees.

It would be amazing to know what theGovernment thinks of the idea that if a privateemployer had the same sort of problems with hisemployees he could simply change willy-nilly theindustrial conditions of employment in the way inwhich the Government is doing now. Of course hecould not. A private employer faced with thissituation-although I am sure he might possiblypersuade this Government to change thelegislation in some respects-cannot do it becausehe feels like it. Private employers are required togo to the Industrial Commission or some other

private tribunal in order that their case can hescrutinised on its merits. The Government. by thislegislation brought in to prevent a hearing-alegitimately filed hearing under the IndustrialArbitration Act-is ensuring that if themechanism which it set up and substantiallyrevamped in 1979 will not allow it to operate toregulate the conditions of employment of people itwas originally intended to regulate. it will take thenecessary action. Effectively what theGovernment is doing is overruling a decisionmade by Senior Commissioner Kelly.

This legislation should be seen as yet anotherattack on the independence and sovereignty of theIndustrial Commission in respect of this sort oflegislation. What is the point of having anIndustrial Commission? How does one persuadeunions to go before the commission and have acase argued on its merits if at the conclusion ofthe ease the Government introduces legislation tochange the effect of the decision?

The Government continually appeals to thesepeople to be responsible unionists and itcontinually refers to unions as becomingincreasingly irresponsible. The litany of unionistswho it is alleged take on irresponsible tackbecomes daily longer. The Government shouldlook at its own position because the reason publicservants in this State have gone on strike for thefirst time in 60 years and the reason teachers havetaken their unprecedented action in ways whichwould have been unheard or only a few yearsago-taking action against their ownemployers-is the actions of this Government andnot because there is something innately wrongwith those workers. The Government, in terms ofits whole attitude in the dispute as it hasprogressed since 1979 and in this legislation, ismaking a mockery of the dispute-settlingprocedures of the Act. It is deliberatelyfrustrating proceedings before the commission. Ireferred before to the delays, to the refusal of theGovernment to negotiate adequately, to its refusalto sort out problems and instead simply removingthose problems by sweeping them under thecarpet.

During the dispute the Government threatenedthe new principal officers with dismissal unlessthey agreed to become chief officers in the PublicService. As an inducement to the principalofficers to join the Public Service, theGovernment offered them additional annual leave,a shorter working week, an additional four publicholidays per annum, and additional wages. This israther amazing. As a result of this change inwhich the principal officers have become chiefofficers employed under the Public Service Act

1407

108[ASSEM ALY

their conditions of employment have substantiallyimproved, including a shorter working week. Herewe have a situation where the FederalGovernment is saying it is against a shorterworking week and abuses anyone who tries toachieve it, where the Minister for IndustrialRelations in Canberra has had to resign becauseof his contretemps, and where the StateGovernment has said it supports the FederalGovernment in regard to the matter of shorterworking hours. But when it comes to a situationwhere expediency rules and where theGovernment wrongly believes that by transferringgroups of workers from one union to another it isgoing to achieve an amicable and more peacefulindustrial situation, it is prepared to give extraannual leave, shorter working hours, additionalpublic holidays, and more wages.

One might say we are objecting to somethingwhich generally speaking the trade unions wouldsupport; but, of course, the answer is that theGovernment hopes to obtain in return for thesethings a compliant group of officers in this level ofthe prison Service. I understand that not onlythese officers have been bludgeoned into leavingthe Prison Officers' Union and joining the CivilService Association, but also the superintendentshave voted recently by 17 to one to go into thePrison Officers' Union. The superintendents ofprisons are the people higher up the scale than thePeople about whom we are talking now and whomthis legislation affects. The superintendents statedby a majority of 17 to one that they wanted to goback into the Prison Officers' Union.

if we consider, for example, the situation withfire brigade officers, it is precisely comparable tothe situation with prison officers. Each firebrigade officer including the chief officers is partof the Fire Brigades Employees Union which likethe Prison Officers' Union adopts a responsibleattitude towards leaving certain officers on dutywhen industrial action takes place.

The prison officers did that at the timne theytook industrial action, because they wereconcerned for the safety of the community, butthe Department of Corrections culpably ignoredthe safety of the community when prisoners could,simply by burrowing at the cell walls ofFremantle Prison, get out in a matter of half anhour and undertake attacks on citizens ofWestern Australia.

The Government has not been inclined toconsider greater prison security. It is somethingabout which the Opposition spoke before theelection, and since then it is something aboutwhich the prison officers have been concernedconstantly. They have been trying to get theGovernment to do something about prison

security. Because of that dispute which was notover wages and conditions or any terms of servicefor the officers-it was not a self-aggrandisementexercise, but a question of security at prisonswhere prisoners could wander around with knivesand other offensive weapons and passports inboxes obviously in anticipation that they wouldnot be inside for very long-the Governmentachieved a situation whereby it has had toundertake a whole series of actions to have theseworkers moved from one union to another. Thehoped-for tong-term effect-possibly not in theshort term-is that the prison officers will becompliant. Senior Commissioner Kelly so rightlypointed out that the only advantage of not havingthe officers under the Prison Officers' Union bycomparison with the Civil Service Association isthat, as the Government believes, they will bemore compliant under the latter than the former.That should be considered in the light of whereindustrial relations in this State are going and theway in which the Government is antagonising itsown work force.

1 ask members to consider the development ofthe Civil Service Association of WesternAustralia and the development of similar bodiesin other States in the way they have changed.Only last week when I was in South Australiathere was a large strike and demonstration by10 000 Government employees against the TonkinGovernment in that State.

Mr Bertram: It is the worst one they have everhad in South Australia. I heard that yesterday.

Mr PARKER: That is quite correct. ThePublic Service employees association in SouthAustralia like the Civil Service Association ofWestern Australia is an organisation which hasbeen forced into a position of becoming-in theGovernment's terms-more militant. The CivilService Association has been forced into aposition of standing in a much stronger way thenhas hitherto been required for the benefit of itsmembers' interests, It has been forced to do thatby this Government which creates industrialproblems aud industrial confrontation. It does notseek to Sort out the problems which lead toindustrial action. It seeks to do what tt isattempting to do here today, and that is remove agroup of workers from one onion to another unionin a forlorn hope they will not cause theGovernment anty anie problems. That is the firststep before the Government says these peoplecannot belong to a union at all. I would besurprised if we do not see such legislation comefrom this Government in the future. I believe suchlegislation and the legislation before us should beopposed.

1408

[Thursday, 30 April 19811 10

The Opposition will oppose the legislationbefore us and it believes the provisions of theIndustrial Arbitration Act are adcquate to coverthe situation. That is evidenced by the fact thatthe prison officers concerned and the departmentwith the assistance of the commission were able tosort out the immediate dispute which concernedwhether solid containers would or would not beprovided. In a short period, less than a week, theparties were able to sort out their difficulties, butthe Government seeks to stop that occurring againand stop these workers from using that avenue ofconciliation.

I oppose the Bill.MR O'CONNOR (Mt. Lawley-Minister for

Labour and Industry) [2.55 p.m.]: in reply to thecomments made by the member for Fremantleand, in particular, his claim that the Governmenthas lost touch with unions and industrial relationsin this State, I say to him quite frankly that theOpposition is out of touch with reality and theneeds of the community generally in this State.This Goverment is trying to ensure the needs ofthe community arc protected properly. Themember said the Government is attempting toreduce arbitration powers, but what it isendeavouring to do is bring into being what we,the Parliament and the public, thought was theposition prior to the recent Industrial Commissionaction before Senior Commissioner Kelly takenby the Prison Officers' Union.

The Government and, I believe, the unions, forsome time believed the position existed as we arenow attempting to bring it into being. For 12months that belief applied.

I ask: Is it right the supervisors belonginig to thePrison Officers' Union should be in the sameunion as the men they supervise? Is that in thebest long-term interests of the public? We on thisside of the House believe it is not and are tryingto make clear the position as we thought it existedwhen the 1979 Act was passed by Parliament.

The member for Fremantle and other membersopposite must realise laws are made by theParliament and carried out by institutions such asthe commission. If, for instance, we found a legalloophole in our legislation which allowedcriminals to commit certain crimes, should we sitback and say "Let that apply and carry onbecause that is the law"? It is the job of thisParliament and this Government to ensure thelaws are applied in a way we believed they wouldbe.

If we consider the legislation as it existed in1979 following the introduction of the IndustrialArbitration Act we realise that at the bottom of

clause 96 it is listed who is eligible to become amember of the Civil Service Association. Webelieved that applied, but the commissioner ruledotherwise.

In considering the matter we believe theapplication of the law as ruled by SeniorComnlissioner Kelly is correct, but we believe it iscontrary to what the Parliament thought and,certainly, contrary to what the Governmentthought, was the ease. What we are trying to donow is bring the legislation back into the propercontext of what we thought existed before thatruling.

It is the commission's right and, certainly, theSenior Commissioner's right to rule as theybelieve the law reads. We have no gripe with theruling and believe it is correct, but we are tryingto bring the legislation back into perspective sothat it reads the way we believed it read when itwas first brought before this House.

The member for Fremantle made somecomments about the CSA and action that will betaken by it. I remind him that the CSA some limeback had a meeting at which it agreed to alter itsrules to allow the people concerned into thecategory of CSA members and to come under itscontrol. I believe it has not at this stage moved onthat decision, and that is because of SeniorCommissioner Kelly's ruling which we believe isright. However, I believe it would be farcical forthem at this stage to put their ease before thecourt. This legislation will ensure all publicservants are Government officers so that we canprotect the public and endeavour to ensure wherepossible that when people strike and leave publicfacilities unattended people will be available tocontrol those facilities and run them in the publicinterest.

Whilst most unions in this State are -responsibleand act properly, a few bludgeon their membersand act in a Nazi style in an endeavour toexterminate the desires of people who do not thinktheir way.

Mr Parker: Would you categorise the PrisonOfficers' Union in that group?

Mr O'CONNOR: I did not say that. If thehonourable member had been listening, he wouldknow I said that most of the unions in this Stateare proper and decent unions but, unfortunately,some are not. All we are trying to do is to bringback some perspective. We are trying to bring thesituation back to the situation that we believedexisted prior to the union taking this matterbefore Senior Commissioner Kelly. I commendthe Bill to the House.

(45)

1409

1410 ASSEMBLY]

Question put andfollowing result-

Mr lBlaikieM r Cla rkoSir Charles CourtMr CowanMr CoyneMrs CraigMr CraneDr DadourMr GrewarMr HassellMr HerzfeldMr P. V. JonesMr MePharlin

Mr BarnettMr BertramMr BridgeMr BryceMr B. T. BurkeM rT. i.-BurkeMr CarrMr DaviesMr H. D. Evans

AyesMr LauranceMr RushtonMr SodemanMr MacKinnonMr MensarosMrf G rayden

a division taken with the

Ayes 25Mr NanovichMr O'ConnorMr OldM rSibsonMr Spriggs.Mr StephensMr TrethowanM r TubbyMr WaittMr WilliamsMr YoungMr Shalders

Noes 17Mr HrmuanMr HlodgeMr JamiesonMr ParkerM r PearceMr TonkinMr WilsonMr Bateman

PairsNoes

Mr I-. T. EvansMr T. H. JonesMr SkidmooreMr GrillMr TaylorMr Mclver

Question thus passed.Bill read a second time.

In Comnnittee

The Chairman of Committees (Mr Clarko) inthe Chair; Mr O'Connor (Minister for Labourand Industry) in charge of the Bill.

Clause I put and passed.Clause 2: Section 96(1) amended-Mr PARKER: This is the operative clause of

the Bill, and I would like to make one or twocomments concerning the Minister's reply to thesecond reading debate. The Minister said that thebasic reason for the Government's action was thatalthough it agreed that Senior CommissionerKelly's decision was a correct legal decision at thetime, the Government believed that the decisionwas wrong in terms of the Parliament's intentionwhen the legislation was enacted.

Because of its relevance to this view, I wouldlike to read the statements made by SeniorCommissioner Kelly in the decision which theGovernment itself considers to be correct. Thiscommences on page 17 of the decision asfollows-

Section 14 of the Public Service Act, 1978,by subsection (3) of it, purports to give the

public Service Board exclusive authority to.inter alia, create offices, appoint officers anddetermine salaries or allowances for officersand determine the conditions under whichsuch salaries or allowances are payable incases in which such matters arc notdeterminable by the Salaries and AllowancesTribunal. It would seem, however, that thatprovision must be read down in the light ofsubsection (2) of section 23 of the IndustrialArbitration Act, 1979,

Senior Commissioner Kelly sets out subsection(2) of section 23 of the Act. His decision thencontinues on page I8 as follows-

Moreover, that the Public Service Actitself envisages the possibility of terms andconditions of an office in the Public Servicebeing regulated by an award made under theIndustrial Arbitration Act appears clearfrom the definition of the expressiont1relevant union" in S.35(4) of the PublicService Act, 1978.

It may also be remarked that anexamination of S.96 of the IndustrialArbitration Act, 1979 and its counterpart inthe 1912 Act seems to support the conclusionthat it was the intention of Parliament thatauthority to decide whether positions whichhad not previously been "overnmentOfficer" positions should be made suchshould reside with the Commission in CourtSession; and that appears particularly to bethe case where the positions in question fallwithin the constitution of a union other thanthe Civil Service Association.

In other words, in that decision which theGovernment believes is a legally correct decision,Senior Commissioner Kelly is saying that in 1912wh~en the Arbitration Act was brought in, in 1978when the Public Service Act was brought in, andin 1979 when the Industrial Arbitration Act wasbrought in, the intention of those who introducedthose pieces of legislation was, in somecircumstances, to allow the IndustrialCommission to make a determination as to howthe conditions of employment of certainGovernment officers would be regulated.

Mr O'Connor: I was referring to the legalrights of the commissioner when I said thosepeople came under the Industrial Arbitration Act.

Mr PARKER: That is the point I was making.Mr O'Connor: We believed that they did not

when the lcgislation was brought forward.Mr PARKER: I said this last year when we

were debating the amendments to Section 23 ofthe Act. During the time I have been in this

1410

[Thursday, 30 April 1981]141

House, not only in relation 10 industriallegislation but also in relation to so much otherlegislation, it has been my experience that theGovernment believes something to be the caseonly to discover subsequently that it is not so. Onewonders whether the Crown Law Department or,in this case, the Public Service Board, are givingcorrect advice to the Government, OralIternatlively, whether these bodies are givingcorrect advice to the Government and theGovernment is not able to interpret that advice ortranslate it correctly into legislation.

Quite clearly Senior Commissioner Kelly saidthat the question of the union to which a workercan belong is tied up totally with the way in whichhis conditions of employment are to bc regulated.In the case of prison officers, their conditions ofemployment are regulated under the IndustrialArbitration Act. On the other hand, in the case ofcivil servants, their conditions of employment areregulated under the Public Service Act. So SeniorCommissioner Kelly is saying that all along theintention has been clear. It is the Commission inCourt Session which will make thesedecisions-not the Government, and not theParliament. The Parliament, in passing thislegislation, envisaged that the Commission inCourt Session would make the decisons.

As I said, here we have the situation where theGovernment was so worried about what mightcome out of the decision of the commission that itwas prepared to direct the prison officers to joinanother union. It would have been quite withinthe provin&e of Senior Commissioner Kelly, on anapplication which was correctly before theCommission in Court Session, to make a decision.Obviously the Government is not prepared to takethat risk; it is not prepared to have the argumentdealt with either by a single commissioner as anaward, or by the Commission in Court Session, asto which union is appropriate

The Government is not prepared to take thatrisk, so it comecs to this Chamber with this Bill toensure that whatever the attitude of thecommission, whatever the attitude of the union,and, most importantly, whatever the attitude ofthe workers themselves, the Government will haveits way and put the employees under the CivilService Association, rather than under the PublicService Act. That is what we object to: That thedecision is taken in this place rather than by theproper industrial authority which was set up forthe purpose.

The Government as an employer should beprepared to put its position before the authorityand take the consequences, which may even havebeen in the Government's favour had the hearing

gone ahead. No doubt once the Bill is passed thehearing before the commission will lapse or theGovernment will submit to the commission that itshould no longer continue to hear the matter.

I believe that places any union or group ofworkers dealing with the Government orappearing before the industrial Commission in aninvidious position because the union or group ofworkers will not know from day to day whetherthe commission will be handling the dispute thefollowing day. If Parliament is not in session thepeople concerned may know for a few monthsthey will not be interfered with, but if theParliament is in session they will know they maywell be in a position where something which isbeing dealt with by the commission will be takenout of its hands.

I suggest that, as with the section 23amendments with which we dealt last year andwhich would have prevented the settlement of themental health dispute in the way it was settledlast year by the Industrial Commission, thislegislation also will prevent settlements of thatsort of problem. I believe the Government isdigging its own grave in the manner in which it isgoing about this. It would be far more sensible toleave these matters in the hands of the properindustrial authority,

Clause put and passed.Title put and passed.

ReportBill reported, without amendment, and the

report adopted.

GENERAL INSURANCE BROKERSAND AGENTS BILL

Second Reading

Debate resumed from 7 April.MR JAMIESON (Welshpool) [3. 14 p.m.1: This

Bill will be supported by the Opposition, but notwith any great degree of relish because it does notappear to give as much protection to the public asone would like to see in this field. In generalsupport of the measure one can say it is a form ofconsumer protection in that it will give the publicsomething they do not have at this time. However,it appears to me that the Bill is a weak approachto the subject, especially when one reads therecommendations of the Commonwealth LawReform Commission after its inquiry intoinsurance agents and brokers.

It appears clear that the Government has fallenfar short of the recommendations which weremade after considerable inquiry. It is true the

1411

1412 [ASSEMBLY]

Government had its own advisory committeewhich brought down certain recommendations.No doubt this Bill was compiled as a result of therecommendations of the committee and aftertaking into consideration the draft Bill suggestedby the Commonwealth Law Reform Commission.However, in doing this the Government seems tohave lost many of the points which seemed to beparamount in the determinations of theCommonwealth Law Reform Commission.

For instance, the Bill does not cover lifeinsurance brokerage. Whilst the Ministermentioned that life insurance generally is carriedout by agents, in this day and age more so thanever before that is not the case because peopleoften obtain limited life cover. I am not referringto extended life cover in which premiums are paidyear after year; I am referring to the type of coverprovided when people take trips. Before leavingthey ring a broker and obtain an immediate cover.The broker might say "Put a chieque in the postand you will be covered. I will take out thenecessary cover for you."

That sort of life insurance is not covered underthis Bill. If the broker fails to meet his obligationsthe persons concerned have no redress because lifeinsurance is not intended to be covered by theSill, Therefore the Bill does not avoid theproblems faced by people who think they havesuch cover when going on a plane or bus trip andwho suffer injury or death in an accident only tofind that the broker has defaulted and notobtained their cover. The persons involved fce agreat deal of trouble in trying solve that problemnbecause the position is not clear.

I would say the fact that many failures haveoccurred in the general insurance field does notmean to say that we should not be concerned alsowith the other field of life insurance. The fact thatagents or companies are registered will notprotect the individual persons affected, and itappears to me the Minister's attempt to grantmore exemptions by way of his proposedamendments on the notice paper to his own Billwill weaken the measure even further.

As I understand it, this is not the attitude of thelarger insurance companies. We have to becareful that the companies do not over-protect theindustry, and the Commonwealth Law ReformCommission sounded a warning in that respect. Itsaid we should not make the academicqualifications required of brokers or agents toohigh. Generally that seems to be the experiencewhen the matter is left to the industry concerned.In America it is often easier to qualify for acourse in medicine than it is to qualify for acourse in some of the professional areas such as

insurance broking because the industry concernedhas made the academic requirements so high thatthey are almost out of reach. They becomeunnecessarily high because such qualifications arenot required in respect of the work undertaken bythe people in the industry.

Often one needs only common sense in order tosucceed. It seems to me that many failures inbrokerage and agency businesses which havecaused problems in the community have occurredfor reasons which are common in respect of allbusinesses; that is, the persons concerned did nothave a proper understanding of businesstechniques, or did not keep proper accounts. Theydid not watch where they were going. This couldsend a person broke, whether he be in the buildingindustry, or in a small corner shop, or whatever.He has to have an understanding of the businesshe is in.

Far too many people could obtain agencies andset themselves up in a form of brokerage positionwithout really knowing what they should bedoing. Before long, people will start to have theirFingers burnt.

When we learn the extent of it. we discover thatthere is a long history of people failing in thisregard. As I say, it has been the subject of manyinquiries, not just the recent one. We want toensure that those who are acting in this capacityin this State are protected. Not all States havethis type of legislation. As a matter of fact, Ithink there is similar legislation in Queenslandonly. However, it is not identical with ours, so weare at an experimental stage in State legislation.

As I have said, the industry claims that it wantsto regulate itself. This leads to a lot of problems.Generally the bigger companies take the view thatthey want some regulation because theirreputations have been tarnished by the actions ofthe agents or broke's, or whatever one might callthem.

When it comes to the definition of a broker, itis interesting to note that one who sets himself upas a broker has to be covered by the provisions ofthe proposed board. The man who has fouragencies is deemed to be a broker. As I said,under the suggested amendments that might bedealt with later, he might be exempted even if hehad 100 agencies, provided the board felt therewas a satisfactory reason for exempting him. Isuppose Lumley, or somebody like that-

Mr Hassell: There is a limit of I0 forexemptions.

Mr JAMIESON: Even above that figure, thereare some circumstances in which there could besome form of exemption. The point is that it does

1412

fThursday, 30 April 19811 41

not matter whether a person has one agency or 10agencies if he defaults. This is the problem-aloophole that needs to be filled. To that extent,the Law Reform Commission recommendationwas a far better provision. Let us consider thedefinition of "insurance broker" in clause 3 of theBill-

(a) a person whosc business, tither alonc oras part of or in connection with anyother business, is to act, for or inexpectation of gain, as an agent forinsureds or intending insureds in thetransaction of general insurancebusiness: or

(b) an insurance agent who is a party toagency agreements with 4 or moreinsurers,

It is interesting to note that in the model Billsuggested by the Law Reform Commission, thedefinition is a little different-

"Registercd insurance broker" means aperson who is for the time bcing registeredunder part (3) whcther in respect of generalinsurance business or life insurance businessor in respect of each of those businesses.

That gives cover overall to people involved in thissort of activity within the industry.

From the point of view of the public, manypeople might think they will be protectedcompletely by the legislation. However, therecould be shortcomings, and they will discoverthem to their regtret and dismay later on. Theymay Find they have not the protection theythought they had.

No doubt there is some disquiet amongst thepublic. That is what is causing the majorinsurance companies to back this type oflegislation. One would normally regard asrestrictive legislation something whichadministered a private enterprise group, andregard it as repugnant to the members of thegroup. However, for the benefit of the good nameof the insurance industry, the members of thatindustry and I see justification for giving them theprotection of a parliamentary Act. People who aredoing business and taking out insurance policieshave to be certain that their transactions will becompleted.

The working party originally set up had anumber of people on it who I thought were ratherimportant in insurance matters in this State.However, it is a disappointment to me to note, onreading the Bill, that it does not include on theboard such people in the membership of theboard. I mention particularly the Commissionerfor Consumer Affairs and the General Manager

of the State Government Insurance Office. One ofthose people might be considered to be associatedwith insurance business, yet he is away from thenormal company actions of insurance, and he isnot subject to the profit motives that thecompanies consider. Therefore, he should be ableto take a more independent view of insurancethan the people associated With the companies.Because of that fact, the likes of such peopleshould be able to give desirable assistance to theboard, and I intend to move to have themincluded on the board at a later stage.

We have before us legislation that is aimed atdoing something good in the community for theprotection of the people who think that becausethey have negotiated with somebody in some wayto secure insurance of the kind for which they arelooking, they are covered and are in a satisfactoryposition. Later they Find that is not so. Therefore,the Bill savours of achieving something, but it isnot achieving what we would like to see it achieve.

The makeup of the Bill is a little unusual. Ihave not seen such a makeup before. Usuallywhen a board is created as a result of legislationin this Parliament, the provisions relating to theboard are included in the legislation itself.However, on this occasion they are included in theschedule. This is most unsatisfactory, because it isnot possible to amend the schedule to a Bill.Therefore, those provisions become exempt fromactions in this legislative Chamber. That is anundesirable feature: and I hope future legislationdealing with boards will not follow such apractice. As I say, such things are usually partand parcel of the Bill, and therefore we can dealwith it by way of amendment. In this case, thoseprovisions have been placed in the schedule.

When the Minister introduced the Bill he didnot explain how many people were likely to fallinto the categories of insurance brokers andagents. It is normal that, when legislation of thisnature is introduced, in which a group of peoplepreviously free from legislative cover are broughtunder it, an indication is given of the number ofpeople concerned. This information should beprovided by the Minister.

The future of the insurance broking industry isin doubt, because the legislation does not set outthe standards necessary for a person to beadmitted to the industry by the board. Entranceinto the industry is "subject to the standard set bythe board". In the report of the Law ReformCommission, an academic qualification was notenvisaged, but rather practical experience wasrequired before a person would be admitted. Forexample. prior to admission into the industry itwould be necessary for a person to have worked in

1413

1414 [ASSEMBLY]

an insurance broker's office for a certain period oftime so that he had gained the practicalexperience necessary to be able 10 work effectivelyin it. These sorts of qualifications and standardsshould have been set down in the legislation andwe should know the admission standards whichwill determine whether a person will be admittedinto the industry by the board.

It appears it would be practically impossible tohave an academic course which such people couldfollow, but insurance companies may disagreewith that. They might be able to produce apro forma of educational qualifications which theyfeel it would be desirable for a person entering theindustry to have. This is usually what occurs whenlegislation of this nature is dealt with, but the Billbefore us does not contain such provisions.

The best I could say about the Bill is that it isof a piecemeal nature. It will be beneficial tosome extent, but it will not achieve a great deal. Itwill be necessary for us to deal with the legislationat a later stage when the problems to which Ihave referred become apparent. We will have todeal with people who have only one or twoagencies and who default in some form ofbrokerage transaction. An agency usually has anagreement with a company with which it isdealing, but if it is dealing with a number ofcompanies, as many of them are, it is difficult topinpoint the agreement under which it isoperating. There are various agreements betweencompanies and agents and different commissionsare paid. An agent may deal with one companyfor a particular type of insurance because thecommission offered is better than that providedby another company and, at another time, anagent may deal with a different company inrelation to another type of insurance, once againbased on the level of commission.

There is no clearcut definition as to thecompany with which a person is dealing. Theagent is supposed to tell the person concerned thatit is negotiating insurance with a particularcompany with which it is registered. There isprovision for that in the legislation. However,most people do not enter into insurancetransactions daily and it is doubtful whethermany questions will be asked. It is possible thepers(5n may not remember whether the agent toldhim with which insurance company he deals.Indeed the local insurance broker or agent may beleft to obtain the best service possible fromwhichever company he chooses.

I mentioned earlier it appears the largercompanies are keen that the legislation should bepassed and this would be true also of people who

have had unfortunate experiences with theinsurance industry in the past.

The Administration and Public RelationsManager (Mr P. B. Stock) of the NationalMutual Life Association of Australia made thefollIowi ng com men ts-

National Mutual Life, and to myknowledge all the large Australian LifeOffices support the Bill.

In particular National Mutual fullysupports limiting registered agents to amaximum of three general insuranceagencies. This will effect quite a number ofour life agents and I understand that somelife agents have been making representationsto the Government to have this numberincreased. We hope that any suchrepresentations will be resisted as it woulddefeat one of the main objects of thelegislation.

I believe that will be the case. The remarkscontained in that letter indicate generally theattitude of the industry and this was apparent alsoin submissions made when the Law ReformCommission carried out a comprehensive inquiryin this regard.

In our opinion, a few aspects of this legislationneed further study. However, we accept the Bill,because it is better than nothing at all. We do notbelieve the legislation goes far enough and it willnot safeguard the public adequately.

The Opposition supports the legislation andhopes that, within the near future, morecomprehensive provisions will cover all aspects ofthe insurance industry.

Debate adjourned until a later stage of thesitting, on motion by Mr Herzfeld.

WESTERN AUSTRALIAN GREYHOUNDRACING ASSOCIATION BILL

Second Reading

MR H-ASSELL (Cottesloc-Chief Secretary)(3.37 p.m.]: I move-

That the Bill be now read a second time.

This Bill reflects the recommendations of acommittee set up by Cabinet in June 1980 toreport to the Government on the future ofgreyhound racing in Western Australia.

Among other things, the committee comprisingthe Chairman of the Totalisator Agency Board,the Chairman of the Greyhound Racing ControlBoard, and the Director of the Chief Secretary'sDepartment, was asked to report on-

1414

[Thursday, 30 April 19811 41

(a) The existing stale of greyhound racingin Western Australia,

(b) The future of greyhound racing inWestern Australia, and

(c) Government action necessary to put anyrecommendations into effect.

The committee submitted its report to theGovernment in February this year.

Greyhound racing commenced in WesternAustralia at Canningion Central in 1974. TheCanning Agricultural. Horticultural andRecreational Society established the course anderected buildings on land it owns at CanningtonCentral. To do this, the society borrowedapproximately $2 million, financed by commercialbills, secured by a mortgage over the land. Thecomplex ait Canningion Central is leased from thesociety by the Canning Greyhound RacingAssociation.

The association pays rent to the societyrepresenting interest charges and repayments,together with a ground rent of 35 000 per annum.Currently, the association is faced with an annualrental exceeding $250 000 per annum. The debtoutstanding on the Cannington Central venue is$1.65 million. Financially, the association is indire straits.

Even with special assistance from theTotalisator Agency Board in the form of anallocation of $140 000 per annum from "favouritenumbers" it has barely been able to meet theinterest and charges in the 1979-80 financial year.

In its budgets for the current financial year andthe succeeding three years it does not expect to beable to meet any interest or principal payments onany of its debts without incurring further losses.

Since racing commenced at CanningtonCentral. fully paid adult attendances have fallenfrom 100 000 to 66 000 per annum and totalisatorbetting on course has declined. Off course bettingis now at the level of $1 00 000 per meeting.

Greyhound racing at Mandurah, which isconducted under licence from the control boardby the Mandurah Greyhound Racing Association.does not suffer the same problems. Thatassociation is not faced with burdensomerepayments for capital works, Off course bettingai Mandurah nowv almost equates the turnover atCannington Central.

Despite this unsatisfactory situation, thecommittee in its report stated that current officialGreyhound Control Board statistics show that at30 June 1980 there were about 5 000 greyhoundsregistered with the board. In addition. 581 ownersand 441 owner-trainers. I I private trainers, 75public trainers and 37 attendants were registered.

In all, at 30 June 1980, 1 145 persons wereengaged in the industry, mostly part-time. Thisdoes not include permanent and temporary staffemployed by the control board and theassociations, If the sport ceased, many persons.apart fronm those mentioned above, would losetheir livelihoods. Businesses dealing in pet foods.special foods for greyhounds and special suppliesof leashes, muzzles, blankets and the like, wouldlose custom.

The committee concluded that if greyhoundracing was to continue, then clearly two areasmust be immediately restructured if the sport wasto have any chance of surviving in the long term.

The two areas are-the management and operation of thesport; and the re-financing of the capitaldebt of the Carnington Central complex.

The Bill now before the House will enable both ofthese aims to be achieved. It cannot guaranteethat those involved in the industry will be able toachieve the success the industry so badlyneeds-but it does give them a realistic chance todo so.

The Bill repeals the Greyhound Racing ControlAct and abolishes the Greyhound Racing ControlBoard. The Government wishes to emphasise thatthis move is no reflection whatsoever, on theoperations of the control board. The action istaken purely for reasons of economy, and as partof the overall plan to restructure.

The Bill establishes the Western AustralianGreyhound Racing Association which will takeover the regulatory and control function from thecontrol board.

The association will also be responsible for theconduct of racing at Cannington Central. To doso, the Bill provides for the association to takeover the assets and liabilities of the control boardand the Canning Greyhound Racing Association.

The net result of these actions is that there willbe one body, located at Cannington Central,charged with the responsibility of all functionspreviously carried out by the Greyhound RacingControl Board and the Canning GreyhoundRacing Association.

There will be an immediate saving on rentedpremises in the city, now the headquarters of theGreyhound Racing Control Board.

With the co-operation of the WA Turf Cluband the WA Trotting Association, the TotalisatorAgency Board is to invest $1.65 million dollarswith the Canning Agricultural. Horticultural andRecreational Society to discharge the roll over

1415

1416 [ASSEMBLY]

Bills being used to finance the existing debt on theCanningion Central Complex.

The Totalisator Agency Board in return willhold first mortgage over the land and buildings atCannington Central.

The Western Australian Greyhound RacingAssociation will lease the complex from theCanning Agricultural, Horticultural andRecreational Society and pay rent for 15 years.

The basis of the investment with the society isthat it will be interest free for five years, and thenattract 5 per cent per annum for the remaining 10years.

The association will lease the premises for arental based on the arrangement between theTAB and the society and will also be exemptedfromt paying the $5 000 per annum ground rentpresently payable for the first five years, and paya fixed $5 000 per annum ground rent for theremaining 10 years.

This arrangement by the Totalisator AgencyBoard does not affect returns to the Governmentin any way. It does cause a reduction in paymentsmade by the Totalisator Agency Board to the WATurf Club and the WA Trotting Association.

This will be offset to sonic extent by thediscontinuance of the $140000 previously paidunder a special arrangement to the GreyhoundRacing Control Board.

The savings on premises in the city, theconsolidation of all greyhound racing functions atCanningion Central within the one body and therearranged financing of the capital debt on theCannington complex, will give the sportthnecessary impetus to achieve viability.

The Government's involvement is confined tothe initial reorgan~ation which requires statutoryamendment, and as a backer of last resort in theevent of total collapse by the industry and thefailure of all securities.

Whilst the Government has this interest in theprogress of greyhound racing until it becomesviable, it is desirable that the committee of thenew association be appointed by the Governor onthe recommendation of the Minister. Theappointment of a committee of five is provided forin the Bill.

Should greyhound racing prosper as a result ofthe new financial arrangements, it is envisagedthat the new association at a later stage wouldhave a committee of management elected by thegreyhound fraternity, similar to the WA TurfClub and the WA Trotting Association.

However, I must point out that if the industryis not able to put its house in order under these

new arrangements, no further approaches to theGovernment will be entertained.

It is the intention of the Government that theWestern Australian Greyhound RacingAssociation take over the functions of theGreyhound Racing Control Board and theoperations of the Canning Greyhound RacingAssociation by I August 198 1.

The Bill lists the functions of the associationas-

(a) to control, supervise, promote andregulate greyhound racing;

(b) to conduct greyhound racing andprovide facilities to enable greyhoundsto compete in trials and to be trained inracing; and

(c) to exercise and discharge such powers,functions and duties as are conferred onthe association by this Act or any otherAct.

Provision exists for the existing staff of theGreyhound Racing Control Board and theCanning Greyhound Racing Association to betaken over by the new association.

Whilst no immediate staff reductions arccontemplated, experience should prove that, intotal, less staff would be required to conduct theconsolidated functions of the new associationlocated at the one headquarters.

Provision cxists for the appointment of a chiefexecutive officer and such other staff as theassociation may require. The person holding theposition of Secretary of the Greyhound RacingControl Board will become the chief executiveofficer of the association.

The Bill in many respects reflects existingprovisions of the Greyhound Racing Control Act,but also embodies the power to conduct racing asdistinct from the previous regulatory role of thecontrol board.

Provision exists for the Western AustralianGreyhound Racing Association to take over theconduct of racing in country areas if considerednecessary.

The associationi may appoint an administratorto take control of the affairs of a club. This is onlya precautionary measure because the currentoperations of the only country club at Mandurahare satisfactory.

The Bill provides for a maximum of 60 racemeetings in the metropolitan area and for countryclubs.

The committee to manage the functions of theassociation will be appointed by the Governor on

1416

IThursday, 30 April 19811 41

the nomination of the minister for a period ofthree years.

Schedule 2 of the Bill specifies the provisions torepeal the Greyhound Racing Control Act 1972and the dissolution of the Greyhound RacingControl Board.

Schedule 3 contains provisions as to the take-over by the Western Australian GreyhoundRacing Association of the operations at theCannington race course from the CanningGreyhound Racing Association.

The Government considers that under the veryFavourable financial arrangements provided withthe co-operation of the Totalisator Agency Board,the WA Turf Club and the WA TrottingAssociation, coupled with the consolidation of theadministration of the sport, there is every prospectthat greyhound racing in this State can become aviable proposition. However, I repeat that wecannot give a guarantee of that and it will be upto the people in the industry to put forward thosemeasures and to take the steps necessary to makethese opportunities a reality.

I commend the Bill to the IHouse.Debate adjourned, on motion by Mr Jamieson.

GENERAL INSURANCE BROKERSAND AGENTS BILL

Second ReadingDebate resumed from an earlier stage of the

sitting.MR HERZFELD (Mundaring) 13.48 p.mn.]: It

is a rare occasion when I ind myself in someagreement with the Opposition and today is onesuch occasion. Today is one such day when Ilistened to the comments made by the member forWclshpool and I Found myself in agreement withhim on a number of points.

We live in an age where it appears it isnecessary to protect the consumer. Therefore, Ifind myself somewhat reluctant philosophically toaccept all regulations which result in additionalprotection. My view is that the more protectionthere is the greater reliance people will place onothers such as the Government and boards ratherthan on their own ability to protect themselves.

The measure before us is such a device. It is toprotect people from others. I accept the Billand support it-although I do soreluctantly-because it has resulted from aconsiderable amount of public demand anddemand from those people in the insuranceindustry. Therein lies one of my first objections,because I believe that had the insurance industry

been sufficiently aware and interested, it couldwell have done Something itself to protect thepublic in the way this Bill proposes.

It is interesting to note that in his secondreading speech the Minister outlined six majorreasons reported to him by the working party asreasons that failures of brokers had occurred.Upon looking at them one sees clearly that all thereasons are such that had action been taken bythe insurance companies themselves thislegislation would not have been necessary.

The first reason is the lack of relevanttnsurance and/or business experience on the partof the members of the broking company. 1 put itto you, Sir, that had insurance companies in factassured themselves that the people they weredealing with were properly experienced, some ofthe failures that have occurred may not haveeventuated,

The next reason is inept management. Again.this is the sort of thing insurance companiesthemselves should have been aware of. Theyshould have ensured that was not so. The thirdreason is insufficient working capital. Again, thisis a matter of the relationship which existsbetween insurance companies and insurancebrokers.

Mr Jamieson: All these things cause failures inall businesses.

Mr HERZFELD: Yes, failures occur in allbusinesses. We cannot protect against everything.

Mr Jamnieson: I am saying these are the samesorts of things which bring down truckies, andother businessi operators.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Watt): Order!If the member for Welshpool wishes to interject, Iwould appreciate itL if he did so in a manner whichwould make it easier for his comments ito berecorded.

Mr H-ERZFELD: I think what the member forWeshpool was saying is that failures haveoccurred in many businesses for the same reasons.I would agree with him. However, because of thevery special nature of this industry and the specialrole played by insurance companies, I believe thecompanies could have played a more positive rolein vetting brokers.

The fourth reason given by the Minister waspoor credit management by broking firms, andparticularly the failure to maintain adequateCollection procedures for payments due fromclients. Again, that is a management functionwhich reflects the type of people apparentlyinvolved in insurance broking.

1417

1418 [ASSEM BLYJ

The fifth reason given was poor creditmanagement by insurers. Surely that is somethingthat is within the role of the insurance companiesthemselves. The sixth reason was that someinsurance companies and underwriters allowedbroking firms very long credit terms. That againis a matter which insurance companies could havedone something about.

However, having made those comments andhaving said I am somewhat reluctant to acceptany more regulation than we already have, Ipoint out it is a fact that we have reached thepoint where a number of failures have occurredand a number of people have suffered as a result.Therefore, upon looking at the legislation as it isproposed, I find it does provide somec measure ofcontrol of brokers with the least possible amountof intrusion. I give the Minister credit forintroducing fairly simple legislation which willundoubtedly have some effect in ensuring thatpeople seeking insurance cover are protected.

The Bill will not, of course, go the full way andthere is no doubt in my mind that despite thislegislation we will still have cases or theft. That isinevitable because we cannot stop people stealingmoney or misappropriating it in sonie way.

Mr Bertram: Stealing votes, too.Mr HERZFELD: However, where this occurs

there will be professional indemnity and theguarantee fund will provide a small measure ofprotection.

One matter which concerns me is that thelegislation might act to restrict the entry into theindustry of what I would call the small man. Iknow a few small insurance brokers who have anumber of agencies-admittedly probably morethan three or four-and who have acted veryhonestly and arc reputable people who as a matterof course have always handled money they receivein the manner in which this Bill proposes moneyshould be handled. They have done that becausethey are people who are absolutely honest andwho try to do the right thing by the people theyrepresent.

The Bill contains two provisions which I thinkare pertinent to this question of how the smallman will fare in the long term under thislegislation. I refer to clause 10(2), which dealswith qualifications and 10(l) (c) which deals withthe resources a person must have in order to belicensed.

As the legislation stands it seems fairly obviousthat if people who have had appropriateexperience as a broker seek a licence they will nothave much trouble in receiving one, provided theirtrack record has been good. However, theprovision in respect of qualifications is somewvhatopen because I believe it is subject to alteration byregulation. I suppose as lime goes on thequalifications could be gradually tightened so thatthe one-man type of brokerage could be phasedout of the industry.

The same situation applies in respect of clauseI 0(l) (c) which deals with financial resources. Ihope the day will never come when the one-manoperation will be excluded from operating as abroker. Nowadays there are not many things onecan do without being licensed in some way.

Someone suggested to me that one of thesedays. the only occupation left which is notlicensed will be that of members of Parliament.However, I advised him there were a number ofqualifications which had the effect of preventingmany people in various categories from becomingmembers of Parliament, so even that avenue nolonger is open.

Leave to Contlinue Speech

Mr HERZFELD: I move-That I be given leave to continue my

speech at a later stage of the sitting.Motion put and passed.D~ebate thus adjourned.

QUESTIONSQuestions were taken at this stage.

House adjourned at 4.25 p.m.

1418

[Thursday, 30 April 1981] 11

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

858. This question was flurther postponed.

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT

Borden Chemical Plant: Lesehenavlr InletManagement A uthority

878. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) Has the Leschenault Inlet ManagementAuthority investigated and reported onthe proposed Borden chemical plant?

(2) Can I have a copy of the report please?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:(1) No. The plant is not in the Leschnault

I nlet Management Authority'smanagement area.

(2) Not applicable.

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT: LESCHENAULT

PEN INSULA

Vegetation

881. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) In respect of the Leschenault Peninsulawhat is the predominant vegetation onthe southern half of the peninsula?

(2) What is the predominani vegetation onthe northern half of the same peninsula?

(3) What was the predominant vegetationon the southern half of the peninsula 15years ago?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:(1) to (3) Coastal dune scrub 1-2 mn with

some tuart along the eastern margin.

LESCHENAULT IN LET

Fish Deaths

882. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister [or Fisheries andWilIdilif e:

(1) Is it a fact that large numbers of deadfish have been found over the last twoweeks in certain areas coming under theauspices of the Leschenault InletManagement Authority?

(2) In what areas, and on what dates werethey found?

(3) What was the cause of their demise?

(4) What action has been taken to removeor reduce the cause?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

(1) No. Approximately 50 dead fish werereported to fisheries and wildlife,Bunbu ry, on 22 Apr1, 198 1.

(2) Collie River between the elbow and themouth of the Brunswick River, observedon Easter Sunday.

(3) Probably of biological origin as a resultof a toxic algal bloom or temporarydeoxygenatton or the water from adecomposing algal bloom.

(4) Follow up investigation did not show anynew fish deaths, it was a short term onceoff event. No further action taken.

TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE

Education Department: Plans

928. Mr BRYCE, to the Minister for Education:

(I) Has he received a copy of the StateGovernment's technological changestudy group report wherein it is statedintera alia on page 6-

...The impact of new technology inthe private and public sectors hascreated a need for greater awarenessand understanding of new technology.This could be best achieved through anteducation system geared to keeping pacewith technological change and teachingthe new skills essential to themaintenance and development of newtechnologies .... ?

(2) What special plans does the EducationDepartment have to enable theeducation system to keep pace withtechnological change, etc.?

(3) Why was no submission made to thestudy group by the EducationDepartment?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:

(I) Yes.

(2) The Curriculum Branch of theEducation Department maintains anawareness of changing technology and

1419

1420 [ASS EM BLY1

modifies its materials accordingly. Theschools computing section ensures thatschools keep abreast of developments incomputer technology. For example, acourse in "General Computing" hasbeen introduced 10 year I11 classes thisyear. Also a policy paper on"Computing in Secondary Schools" anda discussion bulletin entitled"Computers in Primary Schools" havelately been issued to schools. Copies ofthese publications are tabled.The Technical Education Division of theEducation Department is constantlydeveloping new courses to assist industrypersonnel and the community to becomeinformed about aspects of technologicalchange and to develop new skills in pacewith technological change.

(3) Not invited to do so.

The publications were tabled (see paper' No.175).

TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE

Electronics Industry

929. Mr BRYCE, to the Honorary MinisterAssisting the Minister for IndustrialDevelopment and Commerce:

(1) With reference to the technologicalchange study group report, does hisdepartment accept the view of the studygroup ... that the development of thecomputer and micro-processor comprisesa small though important part of thetotal process of technological change inthe State's economy ...... "? If so-

(a) what positive steps has theDepartment of IndustrialDevelopment taken to encouragethe growth and development of theWestern Australian electronicsindustry;

(b) what policy initiatives in this fielddoes his department have plannedfor the future?

(2) Will the technology review group beundertaking the appropriate researchwork to identify the sectors of industrywhere new technology is likely to havean important impact?

Mr MacK INNON replied:

(1) The department is aware of theimportance of computers andmicroprocessors.(a) The department has a very close

association with the electronicsindustry and was instrumental inthe establishment of the ElectronicsIndustry Association of WA.The growing strength of theelectronics industry is illustrated inthe summer 1981 issue of thedepartment's quarterly magazine.The Systems Research Institute orWA was set up with Governmentsupport and is an important focalpoint for development of computersoftware and other electronicindustry research.

(b) The technology review group isexpected to make recommendationsfor future assistance to the industry.

(2) Yes.

TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE

Trade Unions

930. Mr BRYCE, to the Minister for Labour andIndustry:

(1) Has he received a copy of the StateGovernment's technological changestudy group report-published inFebruary 1981-in which it is stacedinter alia on page 6-

...that in respect of unionamalgamations the study group acceptsthat industry unions can play a vital partin reducing industrial unrest arisingfrom technological change .... ?

(2) Is it the policy of the Government toencourage union amalgamations?

(3) Is it the intention of the Government toencourage and support unionamalgamations in an endeavour toreduce industrial unrest arising fromtechnological change?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:(1) Yes.(2) The Government has endorsed the

recommendations of the technologicalchange study group referred to in (1)above. Paragraph 10 of page 6 of thatreport states in full-

1420

LThursday, 30 April 1981]142

In respect of union amalgamationsthe Study Group accepts thatindustry unions can play a vital partin reducing industrial unrest arisingfrom technological change. Thefact, however, remains that eachindustry and amalgamation willneed to be examined on its meritswith due regard to the interests ofemployees, employers and thecommunity.

(3) Answered by (2).

Australian motorists will be payingfor petrol by the end of the 1 980s;

(b) if so, will he provide details?(2) What evidence is there that the rising

price of petrol has reduced petroleumconsumption in Western Australia inrecent years?

Mr P. V. JONES replied:

(1)(2)

(a) and (b) No.It is difficult to segregate the effect ofrising petrol prices on petroleumconsumption, but I am advised thatpetroleum consumption has decreasedby 7.2 per cent over the last two years.

931. This question was postponed.

COMMUNITY WELFARE

Homeless Persons

WORKING WEEK

Awards

932. Mr BRYCE, to the Minister for Labourand Industry:

(I) What is the estimated proportion of theState's work force-

(a) in the private sector;(b) in the public sector;

which has been granted a working weekof less than 40 hours per week?

(2) What is the estimated proportion of theState's work force which according toaward conditions exceed 40 hours perweek?

(3) What is the estimated proportion of theState's work force which enjoys a "nine-day" fortnight?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

(1) to (3) The information requested is notavailable.

FUEL AND ENERGY: PETROL

Price

933. Mr BRYCE, to the Minister for Fuel andEnergy:

(1) (a) Has his department preparedestimates of the anticipated orapproximate price that Western

934. Mr BRYCE, to the Minister forCommunity Welfare:

(1) (a) Has he or officers of theCommunity Welfare Departmenthad consultations with theCommonwealth Minister for SocialSecurity and/or her officersconcerning the existingCommonwealth programme or'assistance to homeless persons;

(b) if so, what stage have thediscussions reached?

(2) (a) Is it the State Government's policyto take over the administration ofservices presently provided underthe Commonwealth HomelessPersons Assistance Act;

(b) if so, on what basis and with whatfinancial assistance from theCommonwealth?

Mr HASSELL replied:(1) (a) Only with regard to the homeless

youth programme, the Departmentfor Community Welfare has haddiscussions with officers from theDepartment of' Social Security.

(b) In relation to the homeless youthprogramme, final determination ofthe level of' funding for 1981[-82 andguidelines for expenditure are nowbeing considered.

(2) (a) and (b) This is not underconsideration at this point in time.

1421

1422 [ASSEMBLY]

COMMUNITY WELFARE

Homeless Persons935. Mr BRYCE, to the Premier:

What financial assistance does the StateGovernment provide towards homelesspersons or organisations assistinghomeless persons?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:

The State Govenment makes a grant of$10000 to The Jesus PeopleIncorporated, an organisation whichassists homeless persons.

However, it also provides financialassistance to a number of othercharitable organisations which, in thecourse of their day-to-day activities, alsoassist homeless persons.

If the member has any specificorganisation or purpose of assistance inmind, 1 would be pleased to provide therelevant details, if requested.

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT

Development Phone-in Campaign936. Mr BRYCE, to the Honorary Minister

Assisting the Minister for IndustrialDevelopment and Commerce:

(1) Is he aware of the apparent outstandingsuccess of the recent "three daydevelopment phone in campaign"conducted by the Victorian Departmentof Economic Development?

(2) Will he secure details of the campaignfrom his Victorian counterpart andmake the information available to themembers of the Legislative Assembly?

(3) Will he give consideration to theconduct of a development phone incampaign in Western Australia?

Mr MacKINNON replied:

(1) Yes. Whethersuccess", asdependent onviewed.

it was an "outstandingthe member says, ishow the response is

(2) Our information indicates that thethree-day campaign cost in excess of$34 000 in advertisements atone. About1 500 phone calls were received. Theseindicated problem areas largely relatedto administrative delays in the municipalcouncils. The Government decided toappoint a "trouble-shooter" to overcomeproblems.

(3) The current situation in WesternAustralia does not warrant a similarcampaign.-The member may wish to know that thePublic Service Association in Victoriadid not take kindly to the Government'smove and ran counter advertisements inits local papers.

INSURANCEBrokers

037. Mr BRYCE, to the Premier:

(1) With reference to the problems beingencountered by several insurancebrokerage firms around Australia, hasthe State Government maderepresentations to the CommonwealthGovernment urging swift action by theCommonwealth to take action to protectthe many thousands of people who areinsured through insurance brokers inthis State?

(2) (a) Has the CommonwealthGovernment given any indicationthat it proposes to take such action;

(b) ifr so, when is the actionanticipated?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:

(1) and (2) In response fo the need toprotect insurers who have in some casessuffered severe financial losses as aresult of broker failures, the StateGovernment has itself caused a study tobe undertaken leading to legislationbeing presented to this House. Thatlegislation is intended to improve thesituation in Western Australia byrequiring brokers to be licensed andinsured, and by restricting the financialinvestments brokers may make.Initially we had approached theCommonwealth in the hope they wouldmove simultaneously, but when noaction appeared forthcoming we movedseparately.Any action taken by the Commonwealthwill be considered if and when it occurs.

1422

[Thursday, 30 April 1981]142

FUEL AND ENERGY: GAS

NMairal: Resource

938. Mr BRYCE, to the Minister for Fuel andEnergy:

(1) As at 30 June 1980. on a Field by fieldbasis, what was the estimated size ofWestern Australia's demonstratednatural gas resource and whatproportion "as defined as economicallywinnable'?

(2) What proportion of Western Australia'seconomically winnable natural gasresource, on a field by field basis, havebeen allocated to or reserved for-

(a) the State Energy Commission;(b) Alcoa of Australia Limited;(c) export purposes:(d) other specific purposes?

Mr P. V. JONES replied:

(1) and (2) The information sought is bcingcollated and the member will be advisedby letter as soon as possible.

HEALTH

Lasers

939. Mr BRYCE, to the Minister for Health:

(1) What safety standards and controls forthe use of lasers have been introduced inWestern Australia?

(2) Do such controls implement AustralianStandard AS 2211 -1978 "LaserSafety"?

Mr YOUNG replied:

(1) There is provision under the RadiationSafety Act to control the usc of lasers,but regulations for this purpose are stillin the drafting stage.

(2) No, the Radiological Council hasprepared guidelines for users of' lasers inWestern Australia and is using these inan advisory manner. The guidelines aresimilar in many respects to theprovisions of AS 2211I-1978.

CITIZENS

information: Department of Treasury

940. Mr BRYCE, to the Premier:

(1) Does the State Treasury supply otherpublic authorities with informationabout private citizens?

(2) If so-

(a) what information is provided;(b) which public authority/authorities

receive information about privatecitizens from the Treasury;

(c) what guidelines exist to control theUse and disposal of thisinformation?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:

(1) Not to my knowledge, but if the memberhas any information to the contrary Iwould appreciate receiving it.

(2) (a) to (c) A nswered by (I).

94 1. This question was postponed.

PARLIAMENT HOUSE

Telephone Calls: Monitoring

942. Mr B. T. BURKE, to the Speaker:

(1) Is it a fact that incoming and outgoingtelephone calls through the ParliamentHouse switchboard can be monitored'?

(2) If this is so. when and on whoseauthority are calls monitored?

The

(1)

SPEAKER replied:

and (2) This is a matter which comesunder the jurisdiction of the Joint HouseCommittee. I will forward a copy of themember's question to the chairman ofthat committee and ask that he reply tothe member direct.

EDUCATION

Television Programmes

943. Mr TONKIN, to the MinisterEducation:

for

(1) Is his department concerned, as manyteachers are, at the influence of earlymorning television upon students,especially those of a young age?

(2) If so. have representations been made byhim, or upon his behalf, to the televisionchannels concerned?

(3) If so, what are the details?

1423

1424 [ASSEMBLY]

Mr GRAYDEN replied:

(1) to (3) Naturally the department isconcerned at anything which may havean adverse influence on children'seducation. However, as the departmentrecognises the rights of parents to decidetheir children's out of school activities,no direct approach to television channelshas been made.

CONSUMER AFFAIRS

Bail Advertising

944. Mr TONKIN, to the Minister forConsumer Affairs:

(1) Is he concerned with the incidence ofbait advertising-(a) in general;(b) in the miotor vehicle trade in

particular?(2) Have any such complaints been made

this year to the Consumer AffairsBureau'?

(3) If so, what are the details?(4) Is it the policy of the Government that

the bureau handle such complaintsitself, or are they passed over to theTrade Practices Commission?

(5) How many prosecution have been takenin Western Australia in relation to baitadvertising in the past 12 months eitherby the bureau or by the commission?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:(1) (a) and (b) I would be concerned if

there were evidence of a highincidence of bait advertising, but Ido not have evidence of that nature.

(2) and (3) 1 am advised that a number ofcomplaints have been receivedconcerning misleading advertising andsome few of these have related toallegations of bait advertising. There isone matter currently under investigationbut I am not prepared to give detailsbecause it may prejudice the course ofjustice.

(4) Yes, it is the policy of the Governmentthat the bureau handle such complaintsitself.

(5) 17 prosecutions in relation to misleadingadvertising have been taken by thebureau in the past 12 months. It is notpracticable to distinguish cases relatingto bait advertising as such. I have nodetails 1^the prosecution activities ofthe Trade Practices Commission.

EDUCATION

School-do-work Transition Funds

945. Mr TONKIN, to the Minister forEducation:

How much finance has been madeavailable in 1981 by the AustralianGovernment to-(a) Government schools; and(b) non-Government schools;for the purposes of assisting students tomake the transition from school towork?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:(a) The Commonwealth has approved a

notional total of $2.25 million toGovernment Schools in WesternAustralia for the year 1981.Approximately equal portions areto be allocated to secondaryeducation and to technicaleducation.

(b) The amount approved for non-Government schools in WesternAustralia was not finalisedl whenthe Commonwealth Minister forEducation released his most recentstatement on 16 February 198 1.

HEALTH: DISABLED PERSONS

Training

946. Mr TONKIN, to the Minister for Health:

(1) How much has been allocated by theAustralian Government in 1981 for thetraining of the disabled in WesternAustralia?

(2) Is there any State Governmentinvolvement in the Western Australiancommittee for Commonwealthemployment promotion for the disabled'?

(3) If so. what are the details?Mr YOUNG replied:

(I)(2)(3)

The actual amount is not known.Yes.There is a combined committee set upby the Confederation of WesternAustralian Industry and the TLC andthe Department of Employment andYouth Affairs on which there arerepresentatives from State Governmentdepartments.

1424

[Thursday, 30 April 19811 12

BUILDING INDUSTRY

Owner-builders

947. Mr TONKIN, to the Minister for Labourand Industry:

(1) Has the Government received requestsfrom the-

(a) Builders' Registration Board; and(b) Housing Industry Association;

to curb the building of houses by owner-builders, in general, and to prevent thesale of such houses for five years aftertheir completion, in particular?

(2) If so, what is the Government's policy onthis matter?

(3) I f not, is he aware of the development ofsuch a lobby?

(4) Is his department concerned thatcharges have been made in the newsmedia that building materials have beenstolen by owner-builders?

(5) Since his answer to question 162 of 31March 1981, has be been able to verifywhether-

(a) the Builders' Registration Boardcircularised registcred buildersadvising them of their possiblederegistration if they work forowner-builders;

(b) there has been any approach by theboard to lending institutions urgingthem not to approve loans to owner-builders?

Mr O'CON NOR replied:

(I) (a) and (b) Requests have beenreceived to restrict the issue ofowner-builder permits to five years.

(2) and (3) Consideration is being given tothe requests.

(4) This is a matter for the PoliceDepartment to investigate on complaint.

(5) (a) The board circularised registeredbuilders pointing out that it is anoffence to allow the use of theirregistration number to anunregistered person, partnership,company or owner-builder and canlead to deregistration if so done;

(b) I am advised that no such circularhas been issued.

HEALTH

Aromatic Armines

948. Mr TONKIN, to the Minister for Health:

(1) What is his department's policy withrespect to aromatic amines being used incosmetics?

(2) Is it a fact that such additives arecarcinogenic?

(3) Is it a fact that such additions areprohibited in some countries?

(4) If so, which countries have taken thataction?

(5) Is this question currentlyexamined by his department?

being

Mr YOUNG replied:(1) To ensure that no substances harmful to

human health are used.(2) Some are recognised as human

carcinogens.(3) Yes.(4) Not known.(5) Yes.

CONSUMER AFFAIRSInvestments: Advertising

949. Mr TONKIN, to the MinisterConsumer Affairs:

for

(1) Has the Consumer Affairs Bureaureceived complaints relating to theadvertising for the deposit of cash?

(2) Have these complaints related to any ofthe following particular omissions:

(a) a clear statement of the intcrestpayable related to the term;

(b) the security of the investment;(c) the conditions of deposit and

withdrawal, such as, inter alia. theminimum amount to be depositedor withdrawn?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:(1) Yes.

(2) (a) to (c) Yes.

HOSPITALKing Edward Memorial

950. Mr TONKIN, to the Minister for Health:

(1) Is he aware that patients at the KingEdward Memorial Hospital areprevented from watching their owntelevision sets and are directed to hiresets from "Hospital TV Hire" (33Railway Parade, Mount Lawley. Phone271 8100)?

1425

1426 ASSEMBLY]

(2) If he is not aware, will he makeinquiries?

(3) What justification can the hospitaladvance for preventing patients fromwatching their own television sets andputting them to extra expense at a timeof possible hardship and suffering?

Mr YOUNG replied:

(1) Yes. This requirement applies in mostpublic hospitals. Tenders are called forthe provision of TV sets inhospitals-such sets must conform to acertain wiring code.

(2)

(3)

Answered by (I).This requirement is designed to protectpatients and others in the hospital frompossible electrical faults in private TVsets. Tests have shown many privately-owned electrical appliances, such as TVsets, have electrical faults which can bedangerous in the hospital situation.particularly to patients who haveintravenous fluid lines inserted. Beforeprivate TV sets could be brought intothe hospital, it would be necessary forthem to he checked for electricalfaults. This takes time and wouldinvolve the hospital in additionalexpense. In addition, the hospital isliable for any damage caused to privateTV sets on hospital premises.

WATER RESOURCES

Darn: Mandatring

951. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister for WaterResources:

(1) Will increased public use of theMundlaring catchment area be permittedin the near future?

(2) When will this policy be implemented'?

(3) What form will it take'?

Mr MENSAROS replied:

(1) There are no present plans for increasedpublic use of the Mundaring catchmentarea. This may change ifrecom mendat(ions arising from theSystem 6 Review which are notdetrimental to water quality areaccepted by the Government.

(2) and (3) Answered by (I).

LAND

Vesring for Multiple Use

952. Mr BA R NETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

Is it possible under current legislation tovest land for a multiple of uses such aswater, mining, conservation?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

Yes.

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRON MENT

Open Space Planning

953. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) Does the State Government recognisethe need for a State-wide policy for openspace planning and management?

(2) What has been done to formulate such apolicy'?

Mr O'CON NOR replied:

(1) and (2) For the member's enlightenmentand as was carefully explained at thelaunching of the System 6Report "Green Book" yesterday-

(a) The System 6 report is the result offour years' work by a dedicatedgroup of people representing avariety of views and interests.

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report, butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 committee.

(c) Having received the report the EPAis now seeking public commentupon its recommendations.

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewed,the EPA will makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government hasno intention of answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

1416

[Thursday, 30 April 19811 12

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT

Open Space Planfning

954. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) Is it the Government's intention tocreate a secretariat with responsibilityfor co-ordinating open space planning asa matter of urgency?

(2) When will it be formed and how will itbe funded?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:(1) and (2) For the member's enlightenment

and as was carefully explained at thelaunching of the System 6 Report"Green Book" yesterday-

(a) The System 6 report is the result offour years' work by a dedicatedgroup of people representing avariety of views and interests.

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report, butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 committee.

(c) Having received the report the EPAis now seeking public commentupon its recommendations.

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewed,the EPA will makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government hasno intention of answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

TOWN PLANNING

Pri vate Open Space

955. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister [or UrbanDevelopment and Town Planning:

(1) Is it the intention of the Town PlanningDepartment to undertake a review of theTown Planning and Development Act inorder to provide for the management ofprivate open space by local authoritiesas part of a town planning scheme?

(2) When will this review begin?(3) Who has or will be appointed to head

the review?

Mrs CRAIG replied:(I) to (3) See answer to question 962.

RECREATION

Department for Youih, Sport and Recreation

956. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister forRecreation:

(1) Is it the intention of the Department forYouth Sport and Recreation toundertake the production of acomprehensive statewide recreationareas strategy plan?

(2) (a) Will the department be undertakinga survey of the recreationalresources available within System6;

(b) an assessment of current and likelyfuture recreational demand?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:(1) and (2) For the member's

enlightenment, and as was carefullyexplained at the launching of the System6 Report "Green Book" yesterday-

(a) The System 6 report is the result offour years' work by a dedicatedgroup of people representing avariety of views and interests.

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report, butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 Committee.

(c) Having received the report the EPAis now seeking public commentupon its recommendations.

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewed,the EPA will makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government hasno intention of answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

CAMPING

Health Regulations

957. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister for Health:

Will he undertake to have hisdepartment review the public health

1427

1428 [ASSEMBLY]

regulations covering camping so as toallow for informal bush camping areasand low-cost caravan and tent-campingareas along scenic routes?

Mr YOUNG replied:

These mattcrs have been examined anddraft legislation is now being prepared.

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRON MENT

Darling Range

958. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) Does the Government recognise theunique combination of attractive sceneryand water supply potential of thenorthern Darling Range?

(2) Does the Government recognise the needfor overall protection and managementin the area?

(3) What is his Government's attitude to theproposal supported by Sir Paul Hasluckfor a northern jarrah reserve?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

(1) to (3) For the member's enlightenmentand as was carefully explained at thelaunching of the System 6 Report"Green Book" yesterday-

(a) The System 6 report is the result offour years' work by a dedicatedgroup of people representing avariety of views and interests.

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report, butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 committee.

(c) Having received the report the EPAis now seeking public commentupon its recommendations.

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewed,the EPA will makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government hasno intention of answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT

Linear Park

959. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

What is meant by the term "linearpark"?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

A linear park is anormally following aas a river, coastline,or road reserv~e.

long narrow parklinear feature suchor disused railway

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT

Riverline Parks

960. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

What is the Government's attitude tothe provision of riverline parks extendingalong at least one bank of all riversystems with year-round water?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

For the member's enlightenment and aswas carefully explained at the launchingof the System 6 Report "Green Book"yesterday-

(a) The System 6 report is the result offour years' work by a dedicatedgroup of people representing avariety of views and interests.

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 committee.

(c) Having received the report the EPAis now seeking public commentupon its recommendations.

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewed,the EPA will makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government hasno intention of answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

1428

[Thursday, 30 April 1981] 42

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT

System 6: Land Reserves

961. Mr BA R NETT, to the M in isterrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(I) Is it a fact that the System 6 studyrecommends a further 624 km 2 or 2.4per cent of the area of System 6 foraddition -to the 2.1 per cent of existingLand Act reserves?

(2) Is it the Government's intention tocomply with this recommendation?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:.(1) Yes-see page 46 of the System 6

report.(2) For the member's enlightenment and as

was carefully explained at the launchingof the System 6 Report "Green Book"yesterday-

(a) The System 6 report is the result offour years' work by a dedicatedgroup of people representing avariety of views and interests..

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report, butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 committee.

(c) Having received the report the EPAis now seeking public commentupon its recommendations.

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewed,the EPA will makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government hasno intention of answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

TOWN PLANNING

System 6 Study Group

962. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister for LocalGovernment:

(1) Is she and her department aware of thenew planning procedures developed bythe tourism and recreation sub-committee of the System 6 study group?

(2) What are the details of the newprocedures?

(3) What are the new procedures fordeveloping a system of regional openspace developed by the same committee?

Mrs CRAIG replied:(1) to (3) For the member's enlightenment.

and as was carefully explained at thelaunching of the System 6 Report"Green Book" yesterday-

(a) The System 6 report is the result offour years' work by a dedicatedgroup of people representing avariety of views and interests.

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report, butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 committee.

(c) After receiving the report the EPAis now seeking public commentupon its recommendations.

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewed,the EPA will makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government hasno intention of answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT

System 6: Localities

963. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) In terms of the localities identified bythe conservation reserves and nationalparks committee of the System 6 study,how many localities had theirboundaries changed from the time theywere first recommended by thecommittee to the time of publishing thereport?

(2) (a) Which were they; and(b) in each case what was the change

made and the reason for it?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:(1) and (2) For the member's en-

lightenment and as was carefullyexplained at the launching of the System6 report "Green Book" yesterday-

1429

1430 [ASSEMBLY]

(a) The System 6 report is the result offour years' work by a dedicatedgroup of people representing avariety of views and interests.

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report, butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 comittee.

(c) Having received the report the EPAis now seeking public commentupon its recommendat ions.

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewed,the EPA will makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government hasno intention of answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

CONSERVATION AND THE

ENVIRONMENT

Mining: impact

964. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) Is it a fact that the nature of the impactof mining on forestry, water supply ,conservation, and recreation werecomprehensively reviewed by a technicaladvisory group appointed by theEnvironmental Protection Authority?

(2) When did this take place?(3) Is a report available?

(4) Will the Minister please provide mewith a copy?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

(1) Yes, in respect of bauxite mining in theDarling Range area.

(2) August 1978.

(3) and (4) A copy of the report is availablein the reading room of the Departmentof Conservation and Environment or canbe borrowed through the ParliamentaryLibrary.

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT

Bauxite Mining

965. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) Is it a fact that Alcoa's mining andrehabilitation plans are regularlyassessed by a State mining andmanagement planning group?

(2) Is that group attached to theEnvironmental Protection Authority orthe Department of Conservation andEnvironment?

(3) Who are the members of that group?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:.(I) Yes.(2) No.(3) The group is chaired by a senior officer

of the Department of ResourcesDevelopment- others on the group are:the Chairman of the Darling RangeStudy Group, senior officers; of theDepartment of Conservation andEnvironment, Forests Department,Public Works Department, and theMetropolitan Water Board.

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT

Sysi em 6: Pu blic Ut ility A ut horit ies

966. Mr B3ARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

In respect of the System 6 study, why isit considered necessary to allow publicutility authorities to have overridingpowers of access to conservation andrecreation reserves?

M r O'CONNOR replied:For the member's enlightenment and aswas carefully explained at the launchingof the System 6 report "Green Book"yesterday-(a) The System 6 report is the result of

four years' work by a dedicatedgroup of people representing avariety of views and interests.

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report, butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 committee.

1430

[Thursday. 30 April 1981j 14]

(c) Having received the report the EPAis now seeking public commentupon its recommendations.

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewed,the EPA will makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government has

no intention of' answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

TOWN PLANNING: MRPA

Basic Raw aterials Committee967. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister for Urban

Development and Town Planning:

(1) When was the basic raw materialscommittee of the Metropolitan RegionPlanning Authority Set Up?

(2) Who are its members?(3) IFlow often have they met?(4) Which reserves and/or tracts of land

have already been assessed, and withwhat results in each instance'?

Mrs C RA IG replied:(1) The basic raw materials committee of

the Metropolitan Region PlanningAuthority first met on 14 September,1979

(2) Its members are-Chairman-Mr E. R. Gorham (Dept. of

Resources Development)Mr 1. A. Wilkins-(MRPA)

Mr C. F. Porter-(Dp. ofConservation and Environment)

Mr D. J. Collins-(Town PlanningDept.)

Mr C. C. Cheyne-(MRPA)

Dr A. Trendall-(Geologieal Survey)Cr A. N. Whiti ngton-(Loeal

Government Association-City ofFremantle).

(3)(4)

The committee has met four times.The entire metropolitan region is thesubjeet of assessment to determinewhere basic raw materials for thebuilding and construction industry arelocated. The work is not yet complete.

EDUCATION: PRIMARY SCHOOLS ANDHIGH SCHOOLS

Rockinghami

968. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister forEducation:

Would he please provide me with a mapof the Rockingham region showingpresent and proposed high schools andprimary schools?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:

Yes. This information will be forwardedto the member as soon as possible.

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT

System 6: Government Action969. Mr BARN ETT, to the Premier:

(1) In respect of the system 6 study and itsurgent recommendation: "A detailedstudy of the legislation and the roles ofexisting management bodies, leading torecommendations on necessary changesin the present structure and legislationand the need or otherwise for newmanagement bodies with appropriateareas of expertise". what action has theGovernment taken to implement therecommendation?

(2) If no action yet, what will be done andwhen?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:

(1) and (2) For the member's enlightenmentand as was carefully explained at thelaunching of the System 6 report "GreenBook" yesterday-

(a) The System 6 report is the result offour years' work by a group ofpeople representing a variety ofviews and interests.

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 committee.

(c) Having received the report. theEPA is now seeking publiccomment upon itsrecommenida tions.

1431

1432 [ASSEMBLY]

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewed,the EPA will1 makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government hasno intention of answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

CONSERVATION AND THEENVIRONMENT

System 6: Open Space Management970. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister

representing the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) In respect of the System 6 report urgentrecommendation: "'An examination ofthe present funding of management ofopen space leading to recommendationsfor future funding and co-ordination ofdevelopment programmes", what actionhas been taken by the Government sofar?

(2) What action will the Government betaking on this issue?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:(1) and (2) For the member's enlightenment

and as was carefully explained at thelaunching of the System 6 report "GreenBook" yesterday-(a) The System 6 report is the result of

four years' work by a dedicatedgroup of people representing avariety of views and interests.

(b) The report is not either aGovernment or an EPA report, butis a report "to" the EPA by theSystem 6 committee.

(c) Having received the report the EPAis now seeking public commentupon its recommendations.

(d) When all the public submissionshave been received and reviewved,the EPA will makerecommendations to theGovernment in the form of a "RedBook".

In the meantime, the Government hasno intention of answering questions orentering into any debate or discussion onthe report.

BURRUP PENINSULA

Woodside Petroleum Development Ply. Lid.:Cooling Watecr

971. Mr BARNETFT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) In respect of the Woodside Petroleumdevelopment project on BurrupPeninsula, is it a fact that theEnvironmental Protection Authority issatisfied with the mean levels ofcontaminants in the cooling waterexpected under normal operatingconditions?

(2) Are they expected to be-

(a) residual chlorine 0.5 mg/ L;(b) organophosphate anti scaling agent

0.04 rng/L;(c) trisodium phosphate 0.002 mg/L;(d) oil 0.2 mg/L?

(3) (a) Are any other contaminantsexpected; and

(b) if so, what and at what levels?

(4) How often is it expected that operatingconditions other than normal will exist'?

(5) What are the possibilities of higherconcentrations of contaminants?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

(I)

(2)(3)

(4)(5)

Yes, at the expected levels outlined inthe company's ERMP.(a) to (d) Yes.(a) No.(b) Not applicableVery rarely.Negligible.

BURRUP PENINSULA

Woodside Petroleum Developmnict Pty. Lid.:Carbon Dioxide

972. Mr BARNETT. to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) Is the Woodside petroleum developmenton Burrup Peninsula expected todischarge carbon dioxide at a rate of246 000 N m3/hr?

(2) What studies have been done by hisdepartment on the effect of thisdischarge on nearby flora and fauna andon the ocean and its biota?

(3) What were the recommendations ofthose studies?

1432

[Thursday. 30 April 19811 43

(4) Will the Minister provide me with acopy of the report'?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:(I) Yes.(2) to (4) The member is referred to the

EPA's report on the North-West Shelfdevelopment project-O)CE Bulletin No.69.

BURRUP PENINSULA

Woodside Petroleum Development Mty. Ltd.:Gaseous Hydrocarbons

973. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) Relevant to Woodside petroleum'sdevelopment on Burrup Peninsula is it afact that gaseous hydrocarbons will beemitted at a rate of 380 N m3/hr?

(2) What studies have been done by hisdepartment to ascertain the effect of thisdischarge on-

(3)

(4)

Mr

(I)(2)

(a) nearby flora and fauna;(b) the ocean and its biota?

What were the recommendations ofthose studies?Will the Minister provide me with acopy of the report?

O'CONNOR replied:Yes.to (4) It is considered that gaseoushydrocarbon emissions at this levelwould not have any significant effect onnearby ecosystems.

BURRUP PENINSULA

Port Authority

974. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister forTransport:

(1) Relative to the establishment byWoodside Petroleum on BurrupPeninsula is it proposed to establish anew and independent port authority?

(2) What will be its area of control?(3) Will the Minister please advise details?

Mr RUSH-TON replied:(1) This is under consideration.(2) This has not yet been determined.(3) Yes, in due course.

BURRUP PENINSULA

Management Programme

975. Mr BARNETT. to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

What steps have been taken by theMinister's department to implement amanagement programme for BurrupPeninsula to limit incursions by fourwheel drive vehicles and to establish firecontrols'?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:It is not the Department of Conservationand Environment's responsibility toimplement management programmes forBurrup Peninsula.

BURRUP PENINSULA

Aboriginal Sites

976. Mr BARNETT, to the MinisterCultural Affairs:

for

(1) In respect of the Burrup Peninsula hasthe Aboriginal sites department of theWA Museum undertaken surveys ofAboriginal sites within the developmentareas?

(2) Is it a fact that their findings andrecommendations have been presented inat least three reports?

(3) What are those reports?(4) Will he please undertake to provide me

with copies of those reports, or at leastthe sections of them relating to theabove?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:

(1) Yes. Preliminary surveys wereundertaken in 1979 and 1980, and workto record, assess, and where possiblepreserve sites and salvage examples ofrock engravings, has been on-going sinceApril 1980.

(2) Yes. Five have been produced so far:they relate to survey results. Reports onthe current salvage programme will beprepared on completion of the fieldwork.

(3) "Dampier Archipelago LiquefiedNatural Gas Project-A survey forAboriginal Sites", Vol. 1, 1979."A Survey for Aboriginal Sites, KingBay Area". Vol. 2, March 1979.

1433

1434 [ASSEM BLY]

"A Survey for Aboriginal Sites. Quarry,Commu nicat ions Station and AccessRoads, Vol. 3, April 1979."A Survey for Aboriginal Sites,Proposed Access Road," Vol. 4, January1980."A Survey for Aboriginal Sites in theVineinity of Proposed Borrow Pits,Granite Quarry and Lay Down Areas.Burrup Peninsula, Western Australia.Supplementary Report 1I", Vol. 5,August 1980.

(4) The reports are not public documents.

BURRUP PENINSULA

Industrial Deveiopment

977. Mr BARNETT, to the Honorary MinisterAssisting the Minister for IndustrialDevelopment and Commerce:

Is the Burrup Peninsula beingconsidered by the Government as a sitefor further industrial development in thefuture?

Mr MacK INNON replied:

Yes.

BURRUP PENINSULA

Mangrove Sites

978. Mr BA R NETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

In respect of the EnvironmentalProtection Authority bulletin No. 69 onLhe development of the BurrupPeninsula, on page 15 claims appearthat loealised damage to mangrovecommunities appears inevitable. It alsomentions that these features arecommonplace in the region: will theMinister provide me with a map ofBurrup Peninsula showing alternativemangrove sites?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

Such a map is figure B 5 WoodsidePetroleum Development Pty. Ltd.'sERMP. A copy of this document isavailable on loan through theParliamentary Library.

BURRUP PENINSULA

A boriginalI Sites

979. Mr BARNETT, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Conservationand the Environment:

(1) Has a qualified archaeologist beenemployed by Woodside Petroleum todevelop programmes in conjunction withthe WA Museum to minimise damageto Aboriginal Sites?

(2) IF "No", is it expected that this willhappen?

Mr O'CON NOR replied:

(1) and (2) No, However, the company hasprovided the WA Museum with financeand supporting facilities to enable theMuseum to employ qualifiedarchaeologists to record, assess andwhere possible, preserve sites andsalvage examples of rock engravings.

BURRUP PENINSULA

Quarrying

980. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister ForResources Development:

Has Woodside Petroleum in developingBurrup Peninsula had limits placed on itto ensure quarrying operations do nottake place within 200 metres of theshoreline?

M r P. V. JONES repl ied:

Yes.Quarrying operations on the BurrupPeninsula have been approved in twolocations-

(i) immediately behind the supply baseat King Bay which is necessary toprovide adequate land for thisfacility; and

(ii) immediately South of the LNGplant site where the main quarryoperations will be centred.

Detailed consultations took placebetween Woodside and the Departmentsof Conservation and Environment andResources Development and the WAMuseum prior to these approvals beinggiven.

1434

[Thursday, 30 April 19811 43

BURRUP PENINSULA

Woodside Petroleum Development Ply. Ltd.:Restrictions

981. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister forResources Development:

(1) Has Woodside Petroleum in developingBurrup Peninsula had restrictions placedon it which will necessitate consultationswith the Department of Conservationand Environment regarding the disposalof pipeline test solutions?

(2) What are these restrictions?

Mr P. V. JONES replied:

(1) and (2) Pipeline licence No. WA-l-PLissued by the designated authorityprovides as one of its conditions thatdetailed proposals for the treated waterused for testing the offshore pipelineshall be approved by the designatedauthority.

BURRUP PENINSULA

Dredging and Spoil Disposal

982. Mr BARNETT, to the Minister forResources Development:

(1) In respect of Woodside Petroleum'sdevelopment of Burrup Peninsula, hasthe company submitted detaileddredging and spoil disposal plans to theEnvironmental Protection Authority forapproval?

(2) Have they been approved in total?

(3) Will the Minister provide me with plansfor the dredging and disposal?

Mr P. V. JONES replied:

(1) In respect of dredging operationsassociated with the supply base suchinformation has been submitted to theGovernment and approved prior to suchworks commencing.

(2) Approval for dredging operations for allother proposed works has not been givenat this date.

Detailed discussions have been going onfor some considerable time betweenWoodside, Department of ResourcesDevelopment, and the Department ofConservation and Environment onvarious options. To support thesediscussions Woodside has undertakendetailed biological monitoring studies ofsome of the spoil sites underconsideration.

(3) In view of the above, this is not possible.

DAIRYING

Milk: Market

983. Mr HI. D. EVANS, to the Minister forAgriculture:

(1) Has any survey to determine the cost ofproduction of market milk in each of thePinjarra, Harvey, Waroona. Brunswick,Busselton, Pemberton, Northcliffe, andAlbany districts been carried out sincethe 1976-77 financial year?

(2) (a) If "Yes" to (1), what was the costof production in each district;

(b) if "No" to (1). is it intended tocarry out such a survey and, if not,why not?

Mr OLD replied:

(1) In accordance with section 48 of theDairy Industry Act a survey isconducted every three years to estimatethe average cost of production of marketmilk. The most recent survey was for the1979-80 financial year.

(2) (a) No attempt is made to determinecost of production for separatedistricts;

(b) answered by (1).

MUSHROOMS

Donnelly River Mill

984. Mr H. D. EVANS. to the HonoraryMinister Assisting the Minister for IndustrialDevelopment and Commerce:

(1) Has the Governmcnt received a requestthrough the regional administrator ofthe south-west to finance the visit of a

1435

1436 [ASSEMBLY]

New Zealand expert to determinewhether the kilns used previously atDonnelly River mill can be adapted tothe growing of mushrooms for canningby the Manjimup Canning Co-operative?

(2) (a) If "Yes", does the Governmentintend to accede to this request, andif so, when is it expected that thevisit will be made;

(b) if "No", in view of the fact thatmushroom growing for canningpurposes will extend the period ofoperation of the Manjimupcannery, will he have the potentialof the Donnelly River mill kilns forgrowing mushrooms evaluated insome other way, and if so, whatway?

Mr MacKINNON replied:(I)(2)

Not to my knowledge.(a) and (b) It is the Government's

belief that sufficient expertiseprobably exists within WesternAustralia to undertake such anevaluation if a request is made bythe company.

ANIMALS

Donkeys

985. Mr H. D. EVANS, to the Minister forAgriculture:

(1) How many donkeys were shot in-(a) 1980;(b) 1981 (to date)?

(2) Can the carcases of donkeys be used forpet food?

(3) (a) Has any approach been made to theGovernment for assistance to set upa pet food business which involvesthe shooting and processing ofdonkeys; and

(b) if so, what was the result of such anapplication?

(4) Would a proposition which involved theprocessing of donkeys for pet meat beeligible for Government support inprinciple, assuming of course that allother Government requirementsconfirmed with eligibility guidelines?

Mr OLD replied:(I) (a) 1980

Agriculture Protection Board13 600

Pastoralists 30 000 (estimated)Pet meat shooters 20 000

(estimated)(b) 1981 (to date)

Agriculture Protection Board10477

Pastoralists not availablePet meat shooters not available.

(2) Yes.

(3)(4)

(a) and (b) No.The Department of IndustrialDevelopment and Commerce advisesthat each application is treated on itsmerits.

INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS

Injuries Sustained

986. Mr H. D. EVANS, to the Minister ForLabour and Industry:

In what Five industries have workerssustained the greatest number ofindustrial injuries in each of the pastthree years, and what were the numbersin each case?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

IndustryConstruct ionOilier manufacturineWholesale and retail trideFood, beverages, and tobaccoTransport and storage

No of Acciderns Finaisd1976-77 197778 1973-793441 3014 36792519 2 238 2584

1 993 1973 2 316231ig 1941 20591843 1 697 1 594

The above figures include fatal and non-fatal accidents as reported in AustralianBureau of Statistics Reports-IndustrialAccidents, Series B.Figures above refer to date offinalisation of workers' compensationclaims since figures for date ofoccurrence of accidents are not currentlycollected by the bureau.The above figures are the latestcurrently available.

INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS

Injurtics Sustained

987. Mr H-. *D. EVANS, to the Minister forLabour and Industry:

What number of industrial accidents forwhich compensation was paid haveoccurred in the-

1436

[Thursday, 30 April 1981]143

(a) mining industry;(b) timber industry:(c) clerical industries;

in each of the past three years?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:No. of Aeeiderns Finalised

Industry 1971S-77 1977-78 1978-79(a) mining ................................ 1809 1 348 1 573(b) Agriculture, forestry, fishing and

huntIng..................................... 883 722 701(c) Clerical (refer fourth note)............. - - -

Above figures include fatal and non-fatal accidents as reported in AustralianBureau of Statistics Reports-industrialAccidents-Series B.

Figures above refer to date offinialisation of workers' compensationclaims since figures for date ofoccurrence of accidents are not currentlycollected by the bureau.

The above figures are the latestcurrently available.

Accidents involving clerical staff are notprocessed under a separate industryclassification, but absorbed into otherappropriate industry classifications andtherefore figures are not available.

FISHERIES

Tuna: Imports

988. Mr H. D, EVANS, to the Ministerrepresenting the Minister for Fisheries andFauna:

(1) Does the Western AustralianGovernment intend to press the FederalGovernment to impose a tariff onimported tuna?

(2) If' "Yes", what approaches have beenmade and what are the details of anysuch submissions?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

(1) It is not intended to seek the impositionof a tariff on the importation of wholetuna. Under the Customs Tariff Actthere exists a Tariff On the importationof canned tuna.

(2) See above.

M EAT

Reef: Imports

989. Mr H. D. EVANS, to the Minister forAgriculture:

What quantity of beef has beenimported into Western Australia fromthe Eastern States in each or' the pastthree years?

Mr OLD replied:

CartonsBodies

1978 1979 198065 318 27 328 15 2144613 224 -

wo 17April1981387

Cartons are packed to weigh 27 kgs.

ANIMALS

Dingoes

990. Mr H. D. EVANS, to the Minister for

Agriculture:

(I) What has been the cost or' dingo controlto-

(a) the State Government;(b) the pastoral industry;(c) any other involved sector;

in each of the past three years?(2) Have any studies been carried out to

ascertain if the dingo is an endangeredspecies, and if so--

(a) who carried out this research, andwhen;

(b) what were the conclusions of' suchresearch?

Mr OLD replied:

(1) (a) Direct costs of dingo control havebeen-

1977-78 $822 5001978-79 $885 4001979-80 $982 000

Pastoralists contributeapproximately $200 000 per yearthrough agriculture protectionrates, a proportion of' which is usedfor dingo control and is included inthe above:

(b) unknown;(c) unknown.

1437

1438 [ASSEMBLY]

(2) (a) and (b) The Victorian Departmentof Crown Lands and Surveys'Vermin and Noxious WeedsDestruction Board commenced astudy approximately two monthsago, aimed at determining thestatus of the dingo in Victoria.The work will Lake some years tocomplete.

IMMIGRATION

Ethnic Liaison Officer

991. Mr DAVIES, to the Minister forI mmigrat ion:

(1) Why has the ethnic liaison officer beenremoved from Graylands migrant hostelto Noalimba?

(2) Is there a welfare officer presentlystationed at Noalimba?

(3) is he aware that the removal of thisofficer will place significant strain onother officers at Graylands migranthostel?

(4) is it his intention to provide areplacement?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

(I) The ethnic liaison officer was a Stateofficer who was originally madeavailable on a temporary loan basis toassist with the settlement of refugees atGraylands centre. However, the needs,and requirements at NoalimbaReception Centre, the State Governmentmigrant hostel, arc such that theynecessitate the return of this officer.

(2) Yes.(3) Although Graylands centre is a

Commonwealth Government migranthostel, the State makes a significantcontribution to the settlementprogramme conducted at the centre,through State Government departmentssuch as Community Welfare, Healthand Medical Services, and EducationDepartments. The settlement andorientation programme conducted atGraylands centre is primarily theresponsibility of the CommonwealthGovernment.

(4) No.

992. This question was postponed.

SURVEILLANCE CRAFT

P/5O

993. Mr DAVIES, to the Premier:

(1) Further to question 455 of 1981concerning the prototype surveillancecraft P150, can he indicate howrepresentations were made to theFederal Government, and when theywere made?

(2) Will he also advise me of the results ofthe representations when received?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:

(1) Representations to the FederalGovernment were made as early asFebruary 1979 by telex from myself tothe Prime Minister (Mr Fraser).

Subsequent representations have beenmade-

(a) in the form of letters to a number ofFederal Government members ofthe House of Representatives andsenators by the Minister forIndustrial Development andCommerce in May 1980,

(b) in several discussions with seniorpersonnel from the FederalGovernment Departments ofDefence, Transport, andProductivity during 1980-81.

(c) Representation to 11 FederalGovernment departments was madeby the P150 consortium during1980-81 with State Governmentassista nee.

(2) Results of the representation have, indiscussion, indicated a favourableresponse to the vessel by theDepartments of Transport and Defence,but no commitment has as yet beenforthcoming. Subsequent representationsare still under consideration. The Leaderof the Opposition will be advised of theresults when firm decisions have beenreceived.

FUEL AND ENERGY: ELECTRICITY

Power Station: Bunbury

994. Mr DAVIES, to the Minister for Fuel andEnergy:

I Further to question 372 of 1981 relevantto BunbUry power station, can he

1438

IThursday, 30 April 1981]13

provide a list of potential equipmentsuppliers and financiers for the proposedBunbury power station?

(2) Can he also advise when the formalprocess of registration of interest began?

Mr P. V. JONES replied:

(1) and (2) It is not possible to provide anysuch list at the present time since theregistration of interest on the part ofpotential suppliers is still proceeding.Preregistration was called for on 4April, and the closing date for suchregistration is 30 April.

FUEL AND ENERGY: ELECTRICITY

Power Stat(ion: Ord River

995. Mr DAVIES. to the Minister for Fuel andEnergy:

Further to question 370 of 1981concerning negotiations on a proposed60 MW hydroelectric power station atthe Ord River, can he indicate whennegotiations will be completed and canhe give a draft timetable forconstruction of the station?

M r P. V. JON ES replied:Negotiations are still proceeding withthe Northern Territory Government, theCommonwealth Government, andprospective industrial users in the EastKimberley area and no timetable can begiven.

WAGES

Average Weekly

996. Mr BRYCE, to the Minister for Labourand Industry:

(1) Is it a fact that the Western Australianweekly wage rate for adult males, allindustry groups. is $188.26 per week?

(2) Is the wage rate index for January 198 1,the latest monthly indexavailable-caa logue No. 6311 ?

(3) Is it a fact that the rate referred to in(I1) is the lowest rate of all States?

(4) Is it a fact that the rate referred to in(1) is $5.14 per week lower than thenational average?

(5) What are the latest average weeklyearn ing-seasonalfly adjusted-rates forWestern Australia?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:(1) No. Table 5 of ABS Catalogue No.

6311.0 dated 28 April 1981, Shows thelatest weighted average minimumweekly rates payable for a full week'swork-excluding overtime-asprescribed in awards, determinationsand collective agreements for WesternAustralia as being $188.38.

(2) No. The figures for February 1981 werereleased on 28 April 1981.

(3) Yes. However, ABS Catalogue No.6311 .0 states that the indexes are onlydesigned to measure trends in wagerates in current awards, etc., excludingthe effects of changes in the relativeimportance of industries, awards, andoccupations. The weighted average wagerates are, therefore, indexes expressed inmoney terms, and do not purport to beactual current averages.Similarly, neither these weightedaverage wage rates nor thecorresponding index numbers measurethe relative levels of average currentwage rates as between States orindustries.

(4)(5)

Yes.The latest figures for average weeklyearnings-seasonally adjusted-peremployed male unit are included in theABS Catalogue No. 6302.0 dated 23March 198 1-Average WeeklyEarnings. Australia-December quarter.1980.The figure for Western Australia for theDecember quarter is $275.60

HEALTH: DISABLED PERSONS

Employment: National Conference

997. Mr BRYCE, to the Minister for Labourand Industry:

(1) Did the State Government sendrepresentatives to the nationalconference on the employment ofdisabled people held in Canberra on 7March 1991?

(2) If so, what were the names and positionsof the representatives?

(3) Will he table the papers presented at theconference?

1439

1440 [ASSEMBLYl

(4) If the papers are not available, will hesecure them as a mate of urgency forinterestcd members of the LegislativeAssembly?

(5) Is it a fact that Mr C, L. Meeres, QC,chairman of the national advisorycouncil on the handicapped, at theconference stated that the four grcatestobstacles to the rehabilitation of injuredworkers were-

(a) the common law action for damagesfor personal injury, which is stillavailable as an alternative toworkers' compensation;

(b) the litigious nature of thedetermination of workers'compensation claims;

(c) the lack of adequate comprehensiveand co-ordinated rehabilitationschemes;

(d) malingering?

(6) Which of the above obstacles arc notreflected in the Workers' CompensationBill?

Mr O'CONNOR replied:

(1) Yes.(2) 1 am advised that Mr Graham Law,

President of the disabled advocates andself-help group and Mr DarrylMcCarthy, representative of disabledconsumers in this State, represented theState Government and were nominatedby the International Year of DisabledPersons committee.

(3) Papers are not yet available.(4) Yecs.

(5) (a) to (d) 1 understand this was said.(6) The member would be aware that the

Workers' Compensation Bill waspresented to this Chamber on 15 Apriland I am sure that should he care toperuse the Bill he would be able toascertain its content and intent.

EDUCATION: HIGH SCHOOLS

Bentley and Tuarl Hill: Closure

998. Mr BERTRAM, to the Minister forEducation:

(1) Does he still say that $15 milion will besaved by closing Tuart Hill and BentleyHigh Schools?

(2) If "Yes", what precise sum of money, ifany, was actually budgeted for, forsenior colleges as at 7 April 1981 ?

(3) If a sum of money was in fact budgetedfor before 7 April 198 1, what has or willthis money now be used for?

(4) Apart from evidence as to feeder schoolpopulations, what evidence does he have,and when was it obtained, as to thechanging demography of the area servedby Tuart Hill Senior High School?

(5) When and for what purposes was thePost-Secondary Education Commissionestablished?

(6) When did the honourable members. forthe North Metropolitan Province firstlearn of the possibility of the closure ofthe Tuart Hill Senior High School?

(7) Why did he refuse, fail or neglect toattend the public meeting at Tuart HillSenior High School on 15 April 1981?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:

(1) The relocation of secondary schoolstudents from Tuart Hill and BentleySenior High Schools to neighbouringschools will free, at very littlecomparative Cost, buildings worthapproximately $1 5m. for other purposes.

(2) and (3) No money was allocated for theestablishment of senior colleges as at 7April 1981. The savings from the planwill arise over a period of years as theaccommodation of students on these twosites reduces the need for additionalbuildings, particularly in the technicaldivision. Over the next two years it isestimated that the senior colleges willabsorb approximately 1 000 studentswho are currently enrolled in technicalcollIeges. -he alternative cost o Fproviding 1 000 additional places in newbuildings is estimated to be $8 million.Within a period of perhaps five yearsthe senior colleges are likely toaccommodate between I 500 and 2 000students.

1440

[Thursday, 30 April 1981]144

(4) The planning branch of the EducationDepartment employs very sophisticatedprocedures in estimating the futurepopulations of schools. These includeindices for interstate and internationalmigration. indices of retention ofstudents within particular schools, datagiving the number of school age childrenper dwelling from new housingdevelopments and estimates of futurefertility rates. This information ismonitored continuously and tabulatedannually.

(5) The Western Australian Post-SecondaryEducation Commission was establishedby enactment of Parliament on 17December 1976. The functions of thecommission are set out in section 12(2)of the Act.

(6) A statement was released by thePremier immediately following theCabinet meeting on Monday, 6 April.

(7) The member is well aware that theparliamentary debate on this topic wasscheduled for the same evening.

LAND

Agricultural: East of Emu Spur Fence

999. Mr CARR, to the Minister representingthe Minister for Lands:

(1) Does the Government have any plans forland north of the old vermin fence oreast of the emu spur fence to besurveyed and opened up for expansion offarming activities?

(2) If "Yes", wilt he please provide details?

Mrs CRAIG replied:

(1) and (2) The Government has no currentplans for the release of agricultural landin the area nominated.

EDUCATION

Gifted Children's Programme

1000. Mr CARR, to the Minister for Education:

(1) How many children are being cateredfor by the gifted children's programmebeing conducted in Geraldton7

(2) How many children were tested inGeraldton for consideration of inclusionin the programme?

(46)

(3) How many were deemed suitable forinclusion?

(4) How many similar projects are beingconducted elsewhere in the State?

(5) What is the total number of childreninvolved in the State?

(6) What plans are there to extend theprogramme-(a) at Geraldton;(b) in other parts of the State?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:(1) The Education Department has recently

established a special interest centre atfleachlands Primary School, Geraldton,to serve the needs of intellectuallytalented students in the Governmentprimary schools of the Geraldton area.At the present stage of this pilotdevelopment 31 children are enrolled atthe centre.

(2) Approximately 1 000 children wereassessed to determine eligibility forinclusion in the cenitre's programmes.

(3) 31 children have been offered places inthe programme.

(4) Similar projects are being piloted atKalgoorlie and Albany; a similar centreis in operation at Bunbury, and there areothers operating in the metropolitanarea.

(5) There are approximately 400 children inprogrammes of this type in centres inthe metropolitan area and in thecountry.

(6) (a) At the present time there are noplans to extend the special interestcentre programme in Geraldton;

(b) answered by (4) above.

FUEL AND ENERGY: ELECTRICITY

Power Station: Enea bba- Gera Idton Area

1001. Mr CARR, to the Minister for Fuel andEnergy:

(1) With regard to proposals to providepower to the Pilbara from the mainState Energy Commission grid, whatconsideration has been given toconstructing a coal-burning powerstation in the Eneabba-Geraldton area,utilising Eneabba coal, to feed the grid?

(2) What are the benefits to be derived fromsuch a station in terms of-(a) shorter transmission distance to

PiIba ra;

1441

1442 [ASSEMBLY]

(b) decentralisation and diversificationof inputs to grid;

(c) other?

(3) Does the Government see any significantdisadvantage in such a proposal?

(4) If "Yes" to (3), will he please indicate?

Mr P. V. JONES replied:

(1) to (4) Only general consideration hasbeen given since further exploration isrequired to prove up the quantity andquality of Eneabba coal to the pointwhere serious consideration could begiven to its use for power generation.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT

Borden Chemical Co. (Ausi.) Ply. Ltd.

196. Mr BRYCE, to the Premier:

My question concerns the decision of theBunbury Town Council in respect of theproposed establishment of the Bordenchemical industry.(1) Does his Government accept the

decision of the Bunbury TownCouncil as an expression of theopinion of the people of Bunburywith regard to the establishment ofthat noxious industry so close to thepopulation, and as an expression oftheir preference for that factory tobe established out of town in anarea designated for noxiousindustries?

(2) Does his Government have thepower to override the BunbdryTown Council and if so, does itintend to override that decision?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:

(1) and (2) I have heard only indirectly andfrom what was in the newspaper thismorning that the Bunbury TownCouncil, by a small margin, had decidedto reject this industry for the secondtime. I must admit I was rathersurprised, because a lot of negotiationsand discussions had taken place todemonstrate that this industry was notof the injurious nature suggested and ashad been emotively described by certainpeople in their campaign against theindustry.

We have sought this industry for a longtime as a necessary corollary to the veryefficient industry at Dardanup. Iunderstand the Borden company hadexplained at great length why it wasnecessary to locate the industry thcre, ornot at all. I do not know anythingbeyond that.I could not hazard a guess as to whatthe Government's role or intention willbe in the matter. I have asked theMinister for Industrial Development andCommerce to let me know the position. 1wish to discuss the matter not only withhim but also with the company becauseit is very important to Bunbury andWestern Australia as a whole that thischemical industry is established.It is not a new proposal; it goes back tothe days when 1 was Minister forIndustrial Development. We soughtwhat we believed was a very necessaryindustry to give another dimension tothe Dardanup industry. I think mostmembers would like to see such anindustry established in WesternAustralia. I do not intend to express anopinion on a decision of the HunburyTown Council because, frankly, I am notaware of all the circumstancessurrounding the decision-particularlyas 1 had previously been advised thedecision was going to be in favour of theindustry.

EDUCATION

Co) kges of Advanced Education: Closure

197. Mr PEARCE, to the Minister forEducation:

(I) With regard to the "razor gang's"proposal as reported in tonight's issue ofthe Daily News to close the Nedlands,Mt. Lawley, and Claremont Colleges ofAdvanced Education unless the StateGovernment is prepared to pick up thetotal funding tab for those institutions,was that decision made with theconsultation and agreement of the StateGovernment?

(2) If it was not made with the agreement ofthe State Government, was the StateGovernment informed in advance of therecommendation of the "razor gang"?

)442

(Thursday, 30 April 1981)]44

(3) What consideration has been given toways of raising the many millions ofdollars necessary to keep these collegesin existence?

(4) Why has the Churchiands College ofAdvanced Education been exemptedfrom the fate to be shared by the otherinstitutions?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:

(1) to (4) 1 have not seen the newspaperreport to which the member refers.

Mr Pearce: That is rubbish; you were readingthe newspaper just before I asked myquestion.

Mr GRAYDEN: Therefore I ask themember to place the question on notice.

TRANSPORT: AIR

International Charter Services

198. Mr BRYCE, to the Premier:

(1) Appropos a question of mine of a coupleof days ago, to which the Premierindicated his Government supported theproposals of Laker Airways Pty. Ltd.and British Caledonian Airways to bringcheap air charter services to Perth,would the Premier indicateapproximately how long ago it was thatthose companies sought the support ofhis Government?

(2) Could he indicate whether, to the best ofhis knowledge, either or both of thosecompanies currently has a submissionbefore the British Government seekingapproval to bring that service to Perth?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:

(1) and (2) The last negotiations anddiscussions known to me between theGovernment and British CaledonianAirways and Laker Airways Pty. Ltd.took place towards the end of Januaryand perhaps into the first week in

February. Prior to that, the Minister forTourism and the Minister for Transportwerc involved in discussions with bothenterprises and the companies were alsoin consultation with me through the twoMinisters. We encouraged thecompanies to further their applicationsbecause we believe Australia is going toneed all of this type of traffic it can getif it is going to get into the internationaltourist circuit, quite apart from the useof these aircraft by commercial people.In these two cases we thought more interms of the package-type tour. Thetourist-type visitor is very important tothe system. We are also anxious to havesuch airlines land in Western Australiafor at least some of their servicesbecause we would then get theopportunity to have some of the touristsstay in Western Australia and becomepart of our own tourist circuit.

Both companies were very activelypursuing their applications, includingthe through Perth proposals, before theBritish authorities. I can say that withsome confidence because it happened tobe in the few hours I spent in London onmy way back to Perth at the end of myJanuary visit to America that I took theliberty of going down to hear the inquirycommence. I was rather anxious to seehow the inquiry was held. Both LakerAirways Pty. Ltd. and BritishCaledonian Airways had an applicationbefore the inquiry, and both stated theirposition at that time. Members mustbear in mind that the inquiry was due tocontinue for some weeks; in fact, Iwould be surprised if it has yetconcluded. Needless to say, BritishAirways opposed the application.

I think that answers the member'squestion. We were actively pursuingtheir desire to come to Australia, andparticularly Western Australia.

EDUCATION: HIGH SCHOOL

Tua Hilt, Closure

199. Mr BERTRAM, to the Minister forEducation:

(1) Will he list the various options placedbefore him by his advisers and fromwhich he decided to close Tuart HillSenior High School?

1443

1444 ASSEMBLY]

(2) If'"No", why?

(3) Or the various options placed before himwhat were each of the considerationswhich caused him to close Tuarl HillSenior High School and not some otherschool or schools?

Mr GRAY DEN replied:

(1) Yes, Tuart Hill, Mirrabooka, and PerthModern School.

(2) Not applicable.

(3) The main considerations which led tothe choice of Tuart Kill as the bestoption were-

Central location.Seriously declining enrolments withthis trend continuing.Availability of public transport andaccess roads.Lack of future potential for growthfrom new housing areas.Suitability of facilities.

ED UCATIO N

Colleges of Advanced Education: Closure

200. Mr PEARCE, to the Minister forEd ucat ion:

Since he appears not to have read thenewspaper report to which I referredearlir-he was obviously just looking atthe pictures on the front page-is heprepared to tell the House whether theLynch "razor gang" consulted with theState Government about the proposedtransfer of funding responsibilitycompletely from the Commonwealth andcompletely to the State with regard tothe Mt. Lawley, Nedlands, andClaremont CAEs?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:

I do not know what the member istalking about and I suggc'st he place hisquestion on the notice paper.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

Telephones: Scrambling Devices

201. Mr B. T. BURKE, to the Premier:

Acknowledging the wisdom contained inthe Premier's decision 10 have ascrambling device installed on histelephone line, would he say whether hisGovernment is prepared to extend thesame courtesy to other members of thisHouse?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:

No.

EDUCATION: TERTIARY

Commonwealth Responsibility: Transfer

202. Mr PEARCE, to the Treasurer:

Was any consultation entered intobetween himself, as Treasurer, with theLynch "razor gang" on the question ofthe transfer of Commonwealthresponsibility for tertiary funding to theState Government and, if so, what wasthe outcome of those consultations?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:I think it would be a good idea if wedropped this slangish term of "razorgang" used by the Press when referringto this committee.

Mr Bryce: it flushed off 17 000 jobs-it wasfairly razor-like.

Mr Young: It is the Committee of Review ofCommonwealth Funds.

Sir CHARLES COURT: Until i see thereport made by the committee headedby Sir Phillip Lynch I am not preparedto comment on it. There may be aspectsof it where they have consulted with theStates and there may be others wherethey have not. Prom the generalcomment I have heard there seems to bequite a few items where I cannot recallany consultation with the State.

Mr Pearce: What about the transfer ofeducation funds?

Sir CHARLES COURT: Successive FederalGovernments of both parties have shownno great propensity to confer with the

1444

[Thursday, 30 April 1981]144

States before they make these ratherdramatic announcements. My guess isthat when I read the report there will bea lot of things I hear about for the firsttime.

EDUCATION

Senior Colleges

203. Mr WILSON, to the Minister forEducation:

What is the expected population ofTuart Hill Senior College for each ofthe years 1982 to 1990?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:As indicated in my answer to questi on635 of 15 April 1981, it is consideredunwise to make predictions of this sort.

EDUCATION: HIGH SCHOOL

Tuari Hill: Boundaries

204. Mr BERTRAM, to the Minister forEducation:

(1) Will he describe the boundaries of thearea presently served by Tuart HillSenior High School?

(2) When were the said boundaries lastfixed?

(3) Will he describe the boundaries of thearea served by Tuart Hill Senior HighSchool from its inception, giving thedates of any changes made thereto?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:

(1) Boundaries of the Tuart Hill SeniorHigh School are related to itscontributory primary schools whichare-

OsborneTuart HillYokineKyilla (option to attend PerthModern and Mt. Lawley alsoaccording to location of residence).Mt. Hawthorn (Green St. andnorth of it. Students living south ofGreen St. have the option ofattending Perth Modern SeniorHigh).

(2) 1980.

(3) Because of the very considerablechanges made over the years, due tofluctuations in population, the detailedinformation sought is not available.

CULTURAL AFFAIRS

State Library: Computer

205. Mr BRYCE, to the Minister for CulturalAffairs:

This is a follow-up question to question852 of yesterday; the Minister willrecalt I asked him a series of questionsconcerning the scope and nature of thecomputer information system to beinstalled in the new State Library. TheMinister will recall indicating to me thatsince the Library Board had noindication of what level of funding isavailable, he was unable to provide theanswers to my queries.Can the Minister give some indication ofwhen the Library Board will be advisedof the level of funding available for thiscomputer system but, more importantlybecause public libraries of this sort arebasically built only once a century, willhe give the House an assurance that theausterity campaign does not meanWestern Australians will be asked toaccept second-best with the system to beplaced in the new library building?

Mr GRAYDEN replied:I imagine it will have an approximateidea of the level of funding within thenext three months and I can assure themember for Ascot that quite naturallywe will be going out of our way toensure as far as Possible it has fundswhich are necessary for that purpose.

MINISTER OF THE CROWN

Premier: Visit to Gera/dton

206. Mr B. T. BURKE, to the Premier:

I refer him to his recent visit toGeraldton when he went therespecifically to address a Liberal Partymeeting. As that was the specificpurpose of the visit, will he indicate tothe House whether the expensesattaching to his visit and that of his staffwill be borne by the Liberal Party or theGovernment?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:If the member puts the question on thenotice paper I will gladly answer it forhim in specific detail. I could not beexpected to carry all these

1445

1446 [ASSEMBLY]

administrative details in my head. Imake it clear the Liberal Party was notthe only reason I went to Geraldton.

IVORY

Prohibition of Imports: Request for Funds

207. Mr PEARCE, to the Minister for Policeand Traffic:

The Minister may not have seen theadvertisement in this week's issue of TheSunday Times which had a picture of anelephant with the word "Help" putacross it and a text which purported toseek support in monetary form for afund for animals, It contained a requestfor donations of $5 or more in order toprohibit the import of ivory intoAustralia. Since I have been told thisafternoon by the Bureau of Customsthat the import of ivory into Australiahas been prohibited since 1976 underthe Customs (Endangered Species)Regulations, can he tell me whether thePolice Force regularly monitors theserequests for funds from groups outsideWestern Australia-this groupadvertises from 399 Pitt Street,Sydney-to see that frauds are notpractised through our newspapers andmail?

Mr HASSELL replied:

I did not see the advertisement and Icannot tell the member whether thepolice regularly monitor suchadvertisements. However, if he refers acopy of the advertisement to me I willrefer it to the Commissioner of Police tohave him check it both in regard to thematter of fraud and the restrictions andcontrols we have in this State in relationto the collection of money for allegedcharitable purposes under theCharitable Collections Act.

The SPEAKER: I will take two morequestions.

INCOME TAX

Indexation

208. Mr B. T. BURKE, to the Treasurer:

(1) Is he aware of the recent FederalGovernment announcement in respect oftax indexation and its cessation?

(2) Does he support this FederalGovernment move?

(3) If not, when can the people of this Stateexpect their Premier and hisGovernment to start to countereffectively some of the very harshrestrictions on finance and other mattersthat the Fraser Liberal Government isimplementing to the disadvantage ofevery Western Australian?

Sir CHARLES COURT replied:(1) to (3) The only knowledge I have of the

intention to abandon the tax indexationproposal is what has appeared in thePress. I gather from the statementsreleased that it is the price to be paid formaking the hospital benefit fundscontributions tax deductible. Let me sayat the outset I applaud the decision tomake hospital benefit fundscontributions tax deductible. It is one ofthe things this Government hasadvocated very strongly to the FederalGovernment. I believe this measure willdo more than any other single measureto encourage people to return to hospitalbenefit funds. I also must say in thestrongest terms that the basic philosophybehind what the CommonwealthGovernment has done in respect ofhealth funds is supportcd by thisGovernment because the Medibankscheme, as well as the subsequentvariations it took, has been a disaster.

Mr Pearce: You should have left it.

Mr Bryce: You promised to leave it

untouched.

Sir CHARLES COURT: I hope we canreturn to a situation where peopleunderstand and accept their fairresponsibility; and the needy are takencare of.

Mr B. T. Burke: What about tax indexation?

Sir CHARLES COURT: I am coming tothat.

Mr B. T. Burke: You are taking your time.

Sir CHARLES COURT: People mustunderstand how the private sector cannow be used properly instead of wasted;how the waste within the present systemcan be eliminated; and taxpayersgenerally obtain better value for their

1446

fThursday, 30 April 1981 ] 4

money and at the same time receive top-line health services. We must bear inmind it is not only a matter of hospitals,but also all health and medical services,mental health and community healthservices. There arc a host of otherthings. People forget these and just talkabout hospitals.Apart from any quarrel I might havewith the Commonwealth Governmentabout the small print of itsproposition-[ have many-the basicthrust of it as set out is to my mind verycommendable and will bring about abetter deal for taxpayers and, at thesame time, give better and morebalanced services to the community.Returning to the question relating toindexation, always I have had veryserious reservations, which I haveexpressed, about the indexation oftaxation. If we stop to think for awhile-I have expressed this view in thestrongest terms to the PrimeMinister-we must wonder what is theuse of indexation.As far as I am concerned, the sooner wereturn to the basic method of fixingtaxation which is based on financial andeconomic grounds, the better. This ideaof an indexation of taxation was a "no-win" system for anybody. If we stick toindexation our situation will not beimproved-in fact, we would go slightlyback. If we do not index-wholly or inpart-it means we will just be slippingback further,For my part I want to consider the fineprint of this decision, but I feel as aresult of the health funding and otherdecisions made we will return to aclearer picture which will enable the

taxpayer to receive not only greaterefficiency of health services by State andCommonwealth Governments, but also,hopefully, some taxation reductions.

Mr B. T. BURKE: Supplementary-

The SPEAKER: Order!Mr B. T. BURKE: -to my question, I

would-The SPEAKER: Order!Mr B. T. BURKE: -ask the Premnier

whether-The SPEAKER: Order! The member will

resume his seat. I indicated to him Iwould jemit two further questions;, hisand one from the member for Mt.Hawthorn. I now give the call to themember for Mt. Hawthorn.

EDUCATION

St uden is: Second-chance

209. Mr BERTRAM, to the Minister forEducation:

(1) Does he believe present-day high schoolstudents should be disadvantaged infavour of second-chance students?

(2) If "yes", why?

M r GRAY DEN replied:

(1) and (2) I thank the member for somenotice of this question. It is important toprovide the best opportunities possiblefor present-day high school students,and also for second-chance students. TheGovernment's current policies relating tosecondary education and to theprojected senior colleges will achievethese objectives.

1447