2006 05 09 WEEKLY · 2006-05-16 · 09 May 2006 Motion of Condolence 1433 He was elected to the Mackay City Council in 1967 and was appointed deputy mayor and member of the Mackay

WEEKLY HANSARDHansard Home Page: http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/hansard/

E-mail: [email protected]: (07) 3406 7314 Fax: (07) 3210 0182

51ST PARLIAMENT

Page

PROOF ISSN 1322-0330

Subject

Tuesday, 9 May 2006ABSENCE OF MR SPEAKER ........................................................................................................................................................ 1431ASSENT TO BILLS ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1431PRIVILEGE ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1432

O’Connor, Mr M .................................................................................................................................................................. 1432PERSONAL EXPLANATION ......................................................................................................................................................... 1432

O’Connor, Mr M .................................................................................................................................................................. 1432MOTION OF CONDOLENCE ......................................................................................................................................................... 1432

Deaths of Mr ED Casey and Mr WCR Harvey ................................................................................................................... 1432QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ................................................................................................................................................... 1443

Water Supply ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1443Water Supply ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1443Federal Budget ................................................................................................................................................................... 1444Stafford, Development Application ..................................................................................................................................... 1445Cyclone Larry, Relief Appeal .............................................................................................................................................. 1445Montville, Development Application ................................................................................................................................... 1446Gold Coast Marine Development Project Board ................................................................................................................ 1447Traveston Dam ................................................................................................................................................................... 1447Health System .................................................................................................................................................................... 1448Water Supply ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1449Water Supply ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1449Rathdowney Dam ............................................................................................................................................................... 1450Pacific Motorway Upgrade ................................................................................................................................................. 1451Traveston Dam ................................................................................................................................................................... 1451Rental Housing Market ....................................................................................................................................................... 1453Water Supply ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1453Apprentices and Trainees .................................................................................................................................................. 1453

PETITIONS ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1454PAPERS ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 1454SCRUTINY OF LEGISLATION COMMITTEE ................................................................................................................................ 1456

Report ................................................................................................................................................................................. 1456

BY AUTHORITYL.J. OSMOND, CHIEF HANSARD REPORTER—2006

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/hansard/

Table of Contents — Tuesday, 9 May 2006

MEMBERS’ ETHICS AND PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGES COMMITTEE .................................................................................1456Report .................................................................................................................................................................................1456

PARLIAMENTARY CRIME AND MISCONDUCT COMMITTEE ....................................................................................................1456Report .................................................................................................................................................................................1456

MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST ................................................................................................................................................1457Montville, Development Application ....................................................................................................................................1457National Skills Championships ............................................................................................................................................1459Cyclone Monica ..................................................................................................................................................................1459Westgate Project ................................................................................................................................................................1460Beef Australia 2006 ............................................................................................................................................................1461Stock Inspectors .................................................................................................................................................................1462Federal Budget ...................................................................................................................................................................1463North Queensland, Floodproofing .......................................................................................................................................1464Queensland Fuel Subsidy Scheme ....................................................................................................................................1465Traveston Dam ...................................................................................................................................................................1466Federal Budget ...................................................................................................................................................................1467

HEALTH QUALITY AND COMPLAINTS COMMISSION BILL ......................................................................................................1468First Reading ......................................................................................................................................................................1468Second Reading .................................................................................................................................................................1468

MINERAL RESOURCES AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL ................................................................................1470First Reading ......................................................................................................................................................................1470Second Reading .................................................................................................................................................................1470

CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT BILL ..........................................................................................................................................1471First Reading ......................................................................................................................................................................1471Second Reading .................................................................................................................................................................1472

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1473Beaconsfield Mine Rescue .................................................................................................................................................1473

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1473Director-General’s Reserve ................................................................................................................................................1473

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1481Health System ....................................................................................................................................................................1481

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1482Governor of Washington .....................................................................................................................................................1482

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1483Water Supply ......................................................................................................................................................................1483

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1484Obesity Summit ..................................................................................................................................................................1484

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1485Queensland Future Growth Fund .......................................................................................................................................1485

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1486Rolleston Coalmine .............................................................................................................................................................1486

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1486Brisbane Festival ................................................................................................................................................................1486

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1487Beef Australia 2006; Virgin Blue .........................................................................................................................................1487

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1487Premier’s Export Awards ....................................................................................................................................................1487

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1488Ethanol ................................................................................................................................................................................1488

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................................1488Directors-General, Remuneration .......................................................................................................................................1488

WATER AMENDMENT BILL ..........................................................................................................................................................1489Second Reading .................................................................................................................................................................1489

ADJOURNMENT .............................................................................................................................................................................1544Western Hardwood Industry ...............................................................................................................................................1544East Timor Eye Program .....................................................................................................................................................1544Kenmore State High School ...............................................................................................................................................1545Beaconsfield Mine Rescue .................................................................................................................................................1546Rainwater Tanks .................................................................................................................................................................1546Anzac Day ..........................................................................................................................................................................1547Currumbin Valley, Development Application .......................................................................................................................1547Death of Mr WCR Harvey ...................................................................................................................................................1548Longreach Airport Upgrade ................................................................................................................................................1549Wildlife Warriors Worldwide ................................................................................................................................................1549

09 May 2006 Legislative Assembly 1431

TUESDAY, 9 MAY 2006

Legislative Assembly

The House met at 9.30 am.

ABSENCE OF MR SPEAKERThe Clerk informed the House that Mr Speaker was attending the Commonwealth Parliamentary

Association, United Kingdom Branch, United Kingdom seminar. The Deputy Speaker (Hon. J Fouras, Ashgrove) read prayers and took the chair as Acting

Speaker. The honourable member for Glass House was nominated by Mr Acting Speaker as Deputy

Speaker.

ASSENT TO BILLS24 April 2006The Honourable A. McGrady, MPSpeaker of the Legislative AssemblyParliament HouseGeorge StreetBRISBANE QLD 4000I hereby acquaint the Legislative Assembly that the following Bills, having been passed by the Legislative Assembly and havingbeen presented for the Royal Assent, were assented to in the name of Her Majesty The Queen on the date shown: Date of Assent: 24 April

"A Bill for An Act to amend the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001 and the Medical Practitioners RegistrationRegulation 2002""A Bill for An Act to establish Forestry Plantations Queensland to manage, under the Forestry Act 1959, State forests thatare plantation forests, including selling particular forest products from those forests, and to own and use other property forplantation-related purposes, and to amend various Acts""A Bill for An Act to amend the Major Sports Facilities Act 2001"

These Bills are hereby transmitted to the Legislative Assembly, to be numbered and forwarded to the proper Officer for enrolment,in the manner required by law.Yours sincerelyGovernor

2 May 2006The Honourable A McGrady, MPSpeaker of the Legislative AssemblyParliament HouseGeorge StreetBRISBANE QLD 4000I hereby acquaint the Legislative Assembly that the following Bills, having been passed by the Legislative Assembly and havingbeen presented for the Royal Assent, were assented to in the name of Her Majesty The Queen on the date shown: Date of Assent: 2 May

"A Bill for An Act to amend the Racing Act 2002""A Bill for An Act to amend the Consumer Credit (Queensland) Act 1994 to make changes to the Consumer Credit Code,and to amend the Trade Measurement Act 1990 and the Trade Measurement Administration Act 1990""A Bill for An Act to amend the Child Protection Act 1999, the Child Safety Legislation Amendment Act 2005 and theCommission for Children and Young People and Child Guardian Act 2000""A Bill for An Act for the establishment, management and use of recreation areas, and for other purposes"

These Bills are hereby transmitted to the Legislative Assembly, to be numbered and forwarded to the proper Officer for enrolment,in the manner required by law.Yours sincerelyGovernor

1432 Motion of Condolence 09 May 2006

PRIVILEGE

O’Connor, Mr MHon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for State

Development, Trade and Innovation) (9.31 am): In an article on 24 April, the Courier-Mail’s MikeO’Connor made comments about the Premier and me and our supposed dealings with the Gold Coastcruise ship developers. These comments malign my integrity and that of the Premier and they arecategorically untrue. In the article Mr O’Connor asserted—The fix is in. Peter Beattie and his dutiful Deputy Anna Bligh already had decided developers would have their way and be allowedto bulldoze one of the last natural stretches of beachfront land.

His inaccurate article went on—A deal it seems has been done and in the finest traditions of Queensland politics it’s been done in secret.

As the minister responsible for this project, I can state unequivocally that there is no fix. No dealhas been done—in secret or in any other way. Nothing has been decided and a very open and publicEIS process is underway.

Mr LANGBROEK: I rise to a point of order. Mr Acting Speaker, I draw your attention to your rulingon 24 May 2005 about what is a genuine matter of privilege and I ask you to rule.

Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! I think that it would have been better if you had made a personalexplanation.

Ms BLIGH: Can I just complete it? Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Do you seek leave to make a personal explanation?

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

O’Connor, Mr MHon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for State

Development, Trade and Innovation) (9.32 am): I seek leave to make a personal explanation. Leave granted.Ms BLIGH: Mr O’Connor did not contact me or my staff in relation to his article and his offensive

assertions. They are utterly without foundation. I thank the Courier-Mail for publishing my letter refutingthese claims. I await Mr O’Connor’s apology.

MOTION OF CONDOLENCE

Deaths of Mr ED Casey and Mr WCR HarveyHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (9.32 am): I move—

(1) That this House desires to place on record its appreciation of the services rendered to this state by the late Hon. EdmundDenis Casey, a former member of the parliament of Queensland and minister of the Crown, and the late William CharlesRoy Harvey, a former member of the parliament of Queensland; and

(2) That Mr Acting Speaker be requested to convey to the families of the deceased gentlemen the above resolution, togetherwith an expression of the sympathy and sorrow of the members of the parliament of Queensland in the loss they havesustained.

Mr Acting Speaker, as you know, Mr Edmund Denis Casey, or Ed Casey as he was certainlybetter known, had a great faith, confidence and love of the cut and thrust of the political process and, inparticular, a great faith, confidence and love of the Australian Labor Party. He was born on 2 January1933 in Mackay and was educated at Mackay state and high schools and Christian Brothers College.Mr Casey was raised a conservative Irish Catholic with strong Labor values, and he would be the first totell people exactly that. It is funny that his successor is a little bit like that—the new member for Mackay.

He began his working career in 1950 as a bank clerk, and was in the Army Reserve from 1952 to1962. During his time as an Army Reserve officer, he became a truck driver and went to Malaysia in1958 as a military observer. Between 1959 and 1969, he became involved in the family’s truckingbusiness as a carrier and contractor. During this time, he was also chairman of the local, state andfederal Australian Labor Party organisation. Following in his father Jack’s footsteps, Casey waspresident of the Australian Labor Party’s Mackay branch from 1959 to 1969, and was a delegate to theLabor in Politics Convention.

09 May 2006 Motion of Condolence 1433

He was elected to the Mackay City Council in 1967 and was appointed deputy mayor andmember of the Mackay Harbour Board. During his years with the council until 1970, he chairednumerous council committees and was a delegate to all local government conferences. Elected as themember of the Legislative Assembly for Mackay on 17 May 1969, Mr Casey’s maiden speech focusedon an issue close to his heart—the sugar industry and its contribution to the Queensland economy. Healso spoke about the need to develop a strategic long-term water resources plan for the state. Anyonewho spent longer than 30 seconds talking to Ed Casey found he would talk either about sugar or water,and it would not matter in what order. One day it would be sugar and then water and the next day itwould be water and then sugar. He was very passionate.

A government member interjected. Mr BEATTIE: And sometimes, as the minister just said, both at the same time. Mr Palaszczuk: Occasionally a brandy. Mr BEATTIE: I will get to that. During his 26 years in the Queensland parliament, from 1969 to

1995, Ed Casey recorded an astonishing milestone: he was never defeated at an election. Ed Caseyran as an independent Labor candidate in 1972, but rejoined the Australian Labor Party in 1977. Underleader Tom Burns and as part of Labor’s parliamentary cricket team opposition of just 11 seats, EdCasey was the opposition spokesman on primary industries, lands and forestry and, of course, waterresources.

In 1978 Ed Casey was chosen to lead the party following a Labor resurgence in the 1977 stateelection. He was regarded as an effective shadow minister and performer prior to that. He was leaderuntil 1982 and went on to become opposition spokesman for transport, then opposition spokesman onindustry, small business and technology. It was during this time that Labor found itself in the mosttumultuous period of its history, and Ed Casey is widely credited for preserving the unity of the partyduring these difficult times.

In 1989, with the election of the Goss Labor government, Ed Casey was appointed as the ministerfor primary industries and served in this position for almost six years before retiring due to ill health.Prior to his retirement in 1995, Ed Casey was the leader of a parliamentary trade delegation toIndonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore in 1993. He was also member of the parliamentarydelegation to Papua New Guinea and south-east Asia in 1974. Additionally, Ed Casey was a delegate ofthe Australian Constitutional Convention from 1978 to 1986 and a delegate of the 33rd GeneralConference of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association in Malaysia in 1987. ThroughoutMr Casey’s parliamentary career, he was an active member of a number of committees, including theParliamentary Building Committee from 1970 to 1972, the Select Committee of Privileges in 1978 andthe Standing Orders Committee from 1979 to 1983.

Many will have a story about Ed Casey. He was known to keep the parliamentary bar running tilall hours of the morning, singing Australian and Irish songs. Many think he was the only Australian whoreally knew all the verses of Wild Colonial Boy. He enjoyed the odd scotch between songs—

Mr Schwarten: Brandy. Mr BEATTIE: Yes, indeed. It is said that you always had a good night out with Ed Casey, but you

paid for it the next day and so did he.He was a strong-willed man with his own views on things. He was as tough as nails with courage

of his convictions. Ed Casey’s contribution to public life was inspirational, as was his long-standingparliamentary representation. He will be sadly missed. He was certainly a character in every sense ofthe word.

A funeral service for Edmund Denis Casey was held at St Mary’s in Mackay on 5 May 2006. Thelocal member and Minister for Primary Industries and Fisheries, Tim Mulherin, represented thegovernment and the cabinet. The cabinet resolved unanimously to write to Ed Casey’s widow. I wrote toMrs Casey on behalf of the government and Tim Mulherin represented us at the funeral. I want to takethis opportunity to extend my sympathy and that of this House to his wife, children and their family.

It would be remiss of me if I did not say a few personal things about Ed Casey. As you know,Mr Acting Speaker, I was the party secretary at the time that Ed Casey was leader of the Labor Party. Inotice with some interest that he was actually born on the same date as my twins.

Ed Casey was certainly a man of strong convictions; there is no doubt about that. I was talking tothe Leader of the House about this earlier this morning. There was a leadership ballot for the leadership,which again, Mr Acting Speaker, you and I both recall well. He was defeated and he walked from theparty room saying, ‘The king is dead. Long live the king.’ I can recall the Courier-Mail headlined with it. Itsaid everything about Ed Casey; he was absolutely determined. He never gave up, even when therewas significant suggestion for change within the party at that time. Ed Casey was very determined. TheActing Speaker is smiling because both he and I had a role in that, but that is story for another day.


I do want to pay tribute to him. I remember those days well in the sense that they were difficulttimes for the Labor Party. Many members would recall the reform movement that existed at that time, ofwhich I was a member. I can remember there was anxiety about a push for change within the stateparliamentary Labor Party, because we were sick of losing. This was the rank and file view.

I learnt a lesson then as we all did. Opposition may well be an opportunity to develop one’scharacter but it does not mean that one can do anything to achieve things on behalf of the people ofQueensland. That is why the ultimate aim of any political party is to win government. That is why therewas a certain tension that existed at the time.

Ed Casey did provide some stability. The party was divided. There was the Old Guard and theNew Guard. Most members know where Mr Acting Speaker and I sat on those things. The reality is thatEd Casey was able to bridge both parts of the party at that time and until unity came about. If it was notfor that long struggle and the reforms that came with it then the Labor Party would not have won in 1989.

As the changes were being worked out within the party, it was very difficult to be the parliamentaryleader. There would have been no more difficult time to be the state leader of the Labor Party thanduring those very difficult reform years. That is why I have a great deal of respect for Ed Casey. He didhold the party together. I must admit that I was one of the people who was agitating for enormouschange. I am sure that there were times when I was not exactly high on Ed Casey’s list of people to beloved and admired.

But the fruits of what we did are here today. We see it with the numbers in the chamber. We havecome a long way since the 11 members, the cricket team, back in 1974. That came about because ofthose reforms. I stand by everything we did. However, I do make the point that if it were not for Ed Caseythen we would not have been able to hold the party together.

He did improve the position at the election in 1980. We increased our numbers by two seats, if Irecall correctly. Bearing in mind the struggle that went on, federal intervention in 1980 and all the otherthings that is nothing short of a miracle. I do want to pay a strong tribute to Ed Casey.

He came in the historical tradition of Forgan Smith, who was also a member for Mackay. ForganSmith was the longest serving Labor Premier of this state and the longest serving Labor leader. There isa long tradition of that in Mackay. Tim may say this, but if not I will say it for him: Mackay does not tendto have a change of members. They tend to stay for a long time.

Mr Mulherin interjected.Mr BEATTIE: How many?Mr Mulherin: Four since 1915. Mr BEATTIE: There we go. That is not bad. There have been four members since 1915. How

long have you been here?Mr Mulherin: Since 1995. Mr BEATTIE: You have a long way to go. You have only been here just on 11 years. Hopefully

you will not be disappearing in a hurry. I hope that we see the Tim Mulherin, Ed Casey, Forgan Smithtradition continue in the seat of Mackay. They also seem to have a tradition when it comes to primaryindustries ministers. I pay tribute to Ed Casey and I wish his family well.

In relation to Roy Harvey, I knew Roy well. I pay tribute to him. William Charles Roy Harvey, betterknown as Roy Harvey, was a long-serving member of the Brisbane Labor community and an earlyinnovator. The creation of the Queen Street Mall, the introduction of wheelie bins, and the constructionof the Brisbane Entertainment Centre are impressive notches in his belt of lifetime achievements.

Born in Brisbane on 6 January 1921 and educated at Kedron State School, Mr Harvey beganwork as an industrial leather chemist before becoming a local government investigations officer. He wasalso a member of the Royal Chemical Institute of Australia. He was the president of the Leather TradesUnion and a Trades and Labour Council delegate.

During World War II, Roy Harvey served as a sergeant in the Northern Command Division,Signals. Mr Harvey was an alderman of the Brisbane City Council from 1952 to 1973. He was thechairman of the Transport and Electricity Committee for 12 years. On 27 May 1972, Mr Harvey waselected as the member for Stafford, representing the Australian Labor Party, and served there untilDecember 1974.

He remained as an alderman of the Brisbane City Council until March 1973, when he resigned tobetter attend to his duties as a member of the Legislative Assembly. Returning as an alderman in 1978,Roy Harvey became the Lord Mayor of Brisbane City Council in 1982 and served in this position until1985. Roy Harvey was a member of the Local Government Association and was awarded theQueensland Local Government Association Certificate of Service. Roy Harvey was a very gentlecharacter, but he had guts and he was tough when he needed to be. The ALP owes a lot to Roy Harvey.


A funeral service for William Charles Roy Harvey was held in the Brisbane City Hall on 29 April2006. Henry Palaszczuk, the minister for natural resources and mines, represented the stategovernment at that funeral. I take this opportunity to extend my sympathy and that of this House to hiswife, children and grandchildren.

As I said earlier, I knew Roy Harvey very well. In fact, I was his campaign director for the 1982council election when we won and his campaign director in 1985 when we lost. I actually went throughthe highs and lows with Roy Harvey. Many members will recall that 60 Minutes did an ‘eating at home’interview. I think they treated Roy very unfairly in that. One of the things I learnt out of that exercise wasto never eat on television. There is a real message in that. Roy was a decent individual and I think theytook a biased view.

Sallyanne Atkinson—and I get on with Sallyanne very well—had become the flavour of the monthand I think they decided that Brisbane deserved a change. They decided to have an informal opportunitywhere pizzas were ordered. They took shots of Roy eating the pizza. I remember that it was not a greatlook on television. But Roy was a nice bloke who was having pizza with everybody and did not realisewhat was happening to him.

That was a great shame because Roy Harvey was a fantastic mayor of this city. He had a visionfor it. He worked really hard. Perhaps television was not as kind to him as it could have been. He wasone of those hardworking people. He was a very decent man. We have all come to know differentpeople in politics over the years. There are good, there are bad and there are ugly. Roy Harvey fits intothe good category and he will be sadly missed.

Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (9.45 am): I join with thePremier in the condolence motions for the families of both of these gentlemen. Edmund Denis Casey, orEd as we in this place and his many friends and colleagues across Queensland affectionately knew him,was born on 2 January 1933 in Mackay, Queensland. He died in the same place on 1 May 2006—aplace for which we all know he had a great degree of passion and for which he was certainly a very firmand strong advocate in this House. He was the son of John Patrick Casey and Grace Mary, neeRobinson. He married Laurie Norma Reeves on 20 February 1955 and had five sons and one daughter.He was educated at Mackay State School and Christian Brothers College in Mackay.

His employment history was as follows. For the first three years he was employed as a bankclerk. He resigned from the bank to enter the family transport business, firstly as a truck driver. But at 26years of age Ed was forced to take over the reins of the business upon the death of his father. Ed Caseywent through national service training in 1951 and remained in the Army Reserve for a further 10 yearsfrom 1952 to 1962. In 1955 he became a lieutenant and in 1958 he was promoted to captain. Also in1958 Ed Casey was a military observer in Malaysia.

Ed Casey was elected to the Mackay City Council in 1967 with a record vote which saw hisimmediate elevation to the position of deputy mayor. He was also appointed to the Mackay HarbourBoard. Ed Casey was the youngest president of an Australian Rotary Club when he was elected at 29years of age. That certainly was some achievement. As well as his Rotary involvement, Ed Casey wasinvolved in many local charities and was a prominent sportsman in Mackay playing Rugby League,cricket, tennis and basketball. Ed was the patron of the Queensland Table Tennis Association for anumber of years.

Ed Casey shared his father’s interest in politics and succeeded his father as the Mackay branchpresident of the Australian Labor Party. Ed Casey also served as chairman of local, state and federalALP organisations based in Mackay. In 1969, Ed Casey successfully contested the election as the ALPcandidate for Mackay. During his term as a member of parliament, Ed served as an ALP backbencherand an Independent member. Ed Casey lost Labor Party preselection in 1972 but he contested theelections in 1972 and 1974 as an Independent member and won handsomely on both occasions. Thiswas testament to his personal following and popularity in Mackay. In 1977 he was encouraged to rejointhe Labor Party. He was reported in the Courier-Mail as stating that he was neither a right-winger nor aleft-winger; he was a Labor man.

From 1977 to 1989 Ed Casey held numerous shadow ministry roles including primary industries;industry, small business and technology; transport; rural matters and lands; and forestry and waterresources. From 1979 to 1983 he was a member of the Standing Orders Committee and in 1978 he wasa member of the Select Committee of Privileges. Ed was also a member of the Parliamentary BuildingCommittee from 1970 to 1972. In 1993 Ed was leader of the parliamentary trade delegation toIndonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore. He was also a delegate to the Australian ConstitutionalConvention from 1978 to 1986, a delegate to the 33rd General Conference of the CommonwealthParliamentary Association in Malaysia in 1987 and he also had the distinction of being a member of aparliamentary delegation to Papua New Guinea and South-East Asia in 1974.

From 28 November 1978 to 20 October 1982, Ed was opposition leader. He lost his leadershiprole in 1982 when he was replaced by Keith Wright. The election of Keith Wright ended Ed Casey’sdifficult four years as leader, which was continually plagued with factional brawls and factional infighting.


The Premier gave us a deeper insight into that period a moment ago. Under the Goss Laborgovernment Ed was minister for primary industries from 7 December 1989 to 15 July 1995 when heretired from politics due to ill health caused by his long battle with diabetes.

In his maiden speech, Ed Casey assailed the Commonwealth and state governments about waterinfrastructure. He was a strong advocate for inland pipelines to solve dwindling water supplies—asimilar proposal that was presented for Toowoomba and the Darling Downs. Upon his retirement EdCasey told Courier-Mail journalist Peter Morley that it was not prestige of office or the power thatattracted him to the job of representing the Mackay electorate for 26 years; rather, it was his desire toserve and help people. In that article, which was published on 14 June 1995, he said—I have only had one political ambition—that is that the day when I die—when they lower my body into the grave—there will besomebody at the grave who is able to say that something I had done for them had helped them. Everyone who has come throughmy office door, or who has contacted me, I have tried to treat as perhaps being that person.

That quote sums up the very essence of Ed Casey and the reason he was held in such highregard in the electorate of Mackay, in this place and in other areas across Queensland. In myrecollections of the six years that I shared with Ed Casey in this place, I always found him to be athoroughly decent and fair dinkum bloke. I pass on my condolences and that of my colleagues to hisfamily.

William Charles Roy Harvey was born on 6 January 1921 in Brisbane, Queensland. He passedaway on 23 April 2006 at Caloundra. He was the son of Charles Roy Harvey and Mary, nee Macmillan.On 17 December 1949 he married Pearl Ruby Jess. He had one son and two daughters. He waseducated at Kedron State School.

After completing his formal education, Roy Harvey commenced work in the tannery business. Hisfather was a master tanner and owned a tannery prior to the Great Depression. After his World War IIservice, Roy studied chemistry and became an industrial leather chemist, rising in the job to thetannery’s factory foreman. He was a member of the Royal Chemical Institute of Australia and presidentof the Leather Trades Union. Roy Harvey was also a delegate to the Trades and Labour Council.

Roy Harvey served as a sergeant in the Northern Commands Signal Division. He was a Rotarianand a mason with keen interests in fishing and lawn bowls. Roy Harvey held memberships in a numberof local sporting clubs, including the Metropolitan Rugby League Club, the Stafford Bowls Club, theGrange-Thistle Soccer Football and Youth Club and the West Mitchelton Rugby League Club.

Roy Harvey was elected as an alderman to the Brisbane City Council in May 1952 for the Kedronward. He remained at City Hall until March 1973 when he resigned after winning the state seat ofStafford the year before. He did this to concentrate on his parliamentary and electoral duties as themember for Stafford. Unfortunately for Roy Harvey, his state career lasted only 30 months. He lost hisseat in the Labor Party’s 1974 electoral demise when it was reduced to just 11 members.

In his maiden speech, Roy Harvey raised concerns about the future population growth in south-east Queensland—and it is interesting to note that the more things change, the more they stay thesame. He also raised associated infrastructure issues. Roy expressed the need for people on the landto receive more consideration with regard to rail freights, electricity charges and the like. However, RoyHarvey rejoined the Brisbane City Council as an employee when he was offered a position in thecouncil’s electricity department. Nevertheless, politics and his desire to serve the people were stilldriving forces. In 1979, Roy Harvey successfully contested the council elections and represented theMitchelton ward.

Two weeks later, he was elected vice-mayor to Lord Mayor Frank Sleeman. Roy Harvey was heirapparent to the lord mayoralty. In 1982 he was elected by the Labor caucus as Lord Mayor of Brisbane.Upon the announcement of Roy Harvey’s death, former Brisbane vice-mayor and former member forSalisbury and Archerfield, Len Ardill, listed Roy Harvey’s attributes as a politician as his honesty and hisstraightforward ways. Mr Ardill said that Roy Harvey was not in public office for aggrandisement; hisattitude was that he was there to look after people who were otherwise powerless. These days,politicians could learn a lot from him. Roy Harvey is survived by his wife, Pearl, three children and eightgrandchildren. I pass on my condolences and those of my colleagues to his family.

Mr QUINN (Robina—Lib) (9.56 am): On behalf of the Liberal Party, I rise to pass on to the familyand friends of Roy Harvey and Ed Casey our sympathies and condolences. William Charles Roy Harveywas born in Brisbane on 6 January 1921. His parents were Charles Roy and Mary Macmillan. Roy waseducated at Kedron State School and became an industrial leather chemist working in a tannery andbecoming a factory foreman. In 1949 he married Pearl Ruby Jess and they had one son and twodaughters.

Roy was elected alderman for the Kedron ward in 1952 and served on the Brisbane City Counciluntil 1973 when he resigned to attend to his duties as the state member for Stafford. He had won theseat of Stafford a year earlier in 1972 and a promising career as a state politician beckoned. However,his time in this House lasted only 30 months when he was one of the many casualties in the 1974 LaborParty wipe-out. Despite his short stint in state parliament he made an impact on everyone he met,


including the man who beat him in Stafford in 1974, the Liberal candidate, Terry Gygar. Terry wrote tome about Roy and said—He worked hard in his electorate and in my experience never had a bad word to say about anyone. Campaigning against Roy wasa pleasure—insofar as an election can be. There were no dirty tricks, no personal attacks, just a clean and very vigorouscampaign with good humour and goodwill shown by both sides.

Roy was one of nature’s gentleman. He served his constituents with energy and honesty and the people of Kedron and Staffordareas were fortunate to have him as their representative.

After Roy’s defeat in the 1974 election he took a position with the Brisbane City Council, whichgot him into hot water with a ‘jobs for the boys’ allegation. But by 1979, he was back as a councillor, thistime representing the Mitchelton ward. In the fierce Labor contest two weeks later, he was elected vice-mayor. He held that position until 1982 when he was elected mayor.

Despite following in the footsteps of Labor legends Clem Jones and Frank Sleeman, Roy madehis own mark as Brisbane’s Lord Mayor and was well liked by both sides of the political divide. Hiscrowning achievements were the creation of the Queen Street Mall, the Boondall Entertainment Centre,the city’s water treatment plant at Mount Crosby and the introduction of wheelie bins—a move that hesaid cost him the lord mayoralty because of the strike by the garbos.

Roy lost the 1985 election to the Liberal candidate, Sallyanne Atkinson, in Brisbane’s first directelection of the lord mayor. He served on the council for a staggering 27 years. After his defeat Roymoved to Caloundra where for 20 years he worked tirelessly for community groups. In 2003 he told theCourier-Mail—My attitude has been ‘A life well spent is a life well lived.’ And I stand by that because it’s true. Once you retire and do nothing, youhave nothing in life.

Roy, who had been ill for some time, passed away on 23 April 2006. He is survived by his wifePearl, his three children and eight grandchildren.

Edmund Denis Casey was born in Mackay on 2 January 1933. His parents were John Patrick andGrace Mary Robinson. Ed went to Mackay primary and high schools and later attended the ChristianBrothers College in Mackay. After graduating, he became a bank clerk for three years before resigningto work in his family’s trucking business. He took over the family business in 1959 when his father died.Also during this time he served as an Army Reservist after completing national service, rising to the rankof captain in 1958. He married Laurette Norma Reeves and had five sons and one daughter.

Ed took an interest in politics at a young age. Being a member of the Labor Party was veryimportant to the Casey family. He served as president of the ALP Mackay branch from 1959 and waselected as an alderman in the 1967 Mackay City Council elections. His vote was so high that he wasimmediately appointed deputy mayor. Ed served out his term on the Mackay council and in 1969 waselected as the state member, a seat he would hold for the next 26 years. In his maiden speech heattacked the state and federal governments over a lack of water infrastructure and promoted the idea ofrunning pipelines to the Darling Downs. It seems that Ed was quite a visionary when it came to water.

Ed suffered a setback when factional infighting led to him losing the ALP preselection for the 1972election. He fought the state election as an Independent and, due to his popularity and strong familyties, won easily, both in 1972 and in 1974, as an Independent. It was Tom Burns who enticed him backto the ALP in 1977, and Ed was made primary industries spokesman and appointed to the front bench.A few months later he made headlines by throwing a French made lolly at government members inprotest over imported goods. There are not many members in any parliament across the globe whocould claim they threw food during a debate, but Ed was certainly one of them.

A year later Ed was elected opposition leader unopposed. It was a tough time to be a Laborleader in Queensland when his position of leader was constantly being undermined and he wasaccused by some as having a one-man band style of leadership. He lost the leadership to Keith Wrightin 1982 in a leadership spill.

When Wayne Goss became Premier in 1989, he became the Minister for Primary Industries, aposition which he held until his retirement in 1995. He was a supporter of the farmer and worked withthem closely on drought policy and sugar reform. I served here with Ed for six years and during that timeI always found him to be a thoroughly decent and personable minister.

Ed retired from politics in 1995 after doctors were forced to amputate his right leg due to diabetes.He took a keen interest in politics right up to his death, asking his son a few hours before his passingabout the turnout on the Labour Day march.

Ed Casey was a dedicated family man, a talented sportsman, involved in many charities and atone point the youngest Rotary Club president in Australia. Ed was also a proud Labor Party man, tellinga reporter from the Courier-Mail, in that famous quote, ‘I’m not a right-winger. I’m not a left-winger. I’m aLabor man.’ Ed Casey passed away in Mackay on 1 May 2006 and is survived by his wife and sixchildren.


Ed Casey and Roy Harvey have made enormous contributions to the state of Queensland. Nomatter what your political persuasion may be, we can look at these two individuals as examples of whatbeing an elected representative is all about. My colleagues, and the Liberal Party organisation, join withthe Premier and the Leader of the Opposition in extending our sympathy to their family and friendsduring this difficult time.

Hon. TS MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (Minister for Primary Industries and Fisheries) (10.03 am): Irise to speak in support of the condolence motion for the late Edmund Denis Casey and Roy Harvey. Myfirst recollection of Ed Casey was as a four-year-old boy attending mass at St Mary’s Catholic Church inMackay with my parents. I was one of six kids. Edmund and Laurie also had six children, and they sat infront of us at St Mary’s. I had very vivid memories of Edmund. More than 45 years later, those memoriesare still very strong.

The enduring relationship between Edmund, his family and St Mary’s was immortalised in a songby another of Mackay’s favourite sons and St Mary’s person, Graeme Connors, in that great song StMary’s Fair. St Mary’s was also a key part of the three ‘F’s of Edmund Casey’s life—his faith, his familyand his friends. These were the essential ingredients of Edmund’s life.

His faith was not one for show. It was deep. It was private. It was reflected in the actions of theman through to his final hours when, asked how he was by Father John Rasmussen, a family friend, helooked up to the crucifix on the wall of the room he was in at the Mater Hospital and quite composed hesaid to John Rasmussen, ‘I’m in his hands.’

His family, his friends and his faith provided both the inspiration and the support for Edmund’ssuccess as a husband, father, grandfather, friend and politician, who left an indelible mark on theQueensland landscape. Edmund’s career as a politician—a path which I, too, followed at his behest—isthe inspiration for some of my fondest memories.

Edmund, after spending various periods of his working life as a bank clerk, truck driver, MackayCity Council alderman, Deputy Mayor of Mackay and president of the local branch of the AustralianLabor Party, was elected to state parliament as the member for Mackay in 1969. Politics was always inhis blood. His father, Jack Casey, was the long-time head of the party in Mackay. The party in Mackayowes the Caseys a lot. During the 1957 split in the Labor Party, I think Mackay was the only regionalarea that did not split asunder. There was only one prominent Labor family that split. It was through JackCasey’s efforts that he held the party together. He was such a strong Catholic churchman. He wouldattend mass and be criticised by the priest of the day about his affiliations to the party. So it was onlynatural that one day his son Edmund would end up in parliament.

As the Premier indicated, for more than 80 years Mackay has had continuous representation by aLabor member in the Queensland parliament. I am the fourth member since 1915. Three of us havebeen primary industries ministers.

During the 26 years in which Edmund was the member for Mackay, he held various positions,including opposition leader and, of course, Minister for Primary Industries. For five of those years, 1972to 1977, he was an Independent member, but he was, I hasten to add, an Independent Labor memberwho constantly voted with the Labor Party.

It was a dark period for Edmund when he failed to gain the endorsement for the Labor Party torepresent Mackay. He resigned from the party and contested the seat as an Independent candidate andsuccessfully won, which demonstrated the support that the people of Mackay had for him. I know whenI was elected in 1995 the party was not sure if it was a Casey seat or a Labor seat and some polling wasdone. At the time in 1995 the Labor Party vote was going south. They polled the seat. By the way, themain issue in 1995 was health. The main issue in Mackay was road infrastructure; it was not health. Sothe party knew that, whilst the people supported Edmund as an Independent, it was a Labor seat to thecore. When Ed was lured back into the Labor fold in 1977, I suppose as a talent too strong to beignored—which was recognised by the opposition leader at the time, Tom Burns—he tackled thegovernment of the day with gusto.

While in the opposition ranks, touring the length and breadth of Queensland—a ‘Caseyism’ sinceadopted as part of this parliament’s vernacular—Edmund, as primary industries spokesperson oropposition leader, would often visit country schools. At some of these schools he would declare a publicholiday, much to the delight of the children, teachers and parents and much to the horror of thegovernment of the day. Edmund told me that one particular minister rang him and said, ‘You can’t dothat’. Edmund’s response was simple—‘Well, you tell them they can’t have the holiday’. Imagine if youdid that today. There would be a riot. Parents would be knocking on your door, telling you that youractions had caused a great disruption to their working lives.

From 28 November 1978 to 28 October 1982, Ed was opposition leader. Once again, this was adifficult time for the Labor Party, with the National and Liberal parties arguably at the peak of their power.He tackled the state government and the federal government during his time in the opposition ranks,without fear or favour. His mantra was to do what he believed was right for the people of Mackay and forthe people of this state.


There is no doubt that Edmund, as opposition leader, was the key to the state parliamentary partymaintaining its position during a period of federal intervention when the party was tearing itself asunder.At that time, Edmund said to me that if he was unable to hold the party together in 1980, if theparliamentary party split, it would have been like 1957 revisited. The party owes him a great deal forwhat he did in separating the problems in the organisational wing of the party and maintaining unity. Infact, as the Premier said, he went on to win two seats in the 1980 election when the party was totallydysfunctional. We have a lot to thank Edmund for. If he had not done that, I do not think we would havewon government in 1989. I believe that the work he did as leader laid the foundations for our eventualwin in 1989.

In late 1989 Ed was in the government ranks, Labor having swept to power under Premier WayneGoss, and he was appointed the Minister for Primary Industries. He held that position until he retired dueto ill health on 15 July 1995. It says much about Edmund that his tenure made my position as the nowprimary industries minister and member for Mackay much easier because of the esteem in which hewas held.

As the Minister for Primary Industries, Edmund had a clear vision. Sugar reform, relief fordrought-stricken farmers and agricultural education were priorities that Edmund strongly advocated atthe cabinet table. Labor has not always had a close relationship with the rural sector. Traditionally, thatsector has links with the National or Country parties. However, due to Edmund’s tireless dedication tothe rural cause—firstly as opposition spokesman and then as minister—many tributes have been paidby people from the rural sector about his contributions.

In my maiden speech on 12 September 1995 I said that Edmund Casey was arguably one of thegreatest primary industries ministers that this state has had. His legacy of administration ensured thatour primary industries are well placed to compete in a highly competitive world. Those thoughts havebeen echoed by many, following Edmund’s passing.

Edmund retired from politics in 1995 after complications from diabetes which forcedthe amputation of his right leg just below the knee. His retirement signalled my own career as aparliamentarian and as the member for Mackay. He was not only my very good mate but also mymentor. He was a people’s person. Edmund understood that the best means by which to comprehendwhat was needed by primary producers and by rural stakeholders not just in his electorate but acrossthe state was to talk to the real people. It was a lesson well learnt from my predecessor.

Upon his retirement from parliament, Ed’s services to Mackay and the state continued. He servedas chairman of the Mackay Port Authority and played a key role in the rapid expansion of the Mackayairport. He was also awarded life memberships of the Australian Labor Party and the MiscellaneousWorkers Union. As I said earlier, he was also the impetus for my standing for preselection and mysubsequent election as the member for Mackay.

I grew up with Edmund’s six children. His wife Laurie was a constant strength in his full life and hisfamily have always been my close friends. Edmund loved Irish music, he loved a drink and he loved tosing in the company of his beloved wife, family and friends. In fact, when he was interred at MountBassett cemetery, a young man from St Patrick’s College played the song Danny Boy on the Uilleannpipes—one of Edmund’s favourite songs. After he was interred, the ceremony concluded with the WildColonial Boy. He would have been quite happy with that.

Edmund provided valuable advice and guidance to me as a young man and as my campaigndirector. He was insightful and he was sincere. He was Labor to the core. Although his life was cut short,it was a full life. It was fitting that he took his last breath on Labour Day, as the Liberal leader hasindicated. Edmund asked his son Terry just moments before he died, ‘How was Labour Day?’ Terryexplained to him that it was a big Labour Day. He said, ‘Good on you, son. Good on ‘em’, then put up histhumb and smiled. They started to prop him up and he took his last breath and passed on from this life.

As I said, Ed died on Labour Day. It was also appropriate, as a deeply religious man, that the dayof his passing was 1 May, the feast day of St Joseph the Worker. It was a very appropriate day forEdmund to pass on. I believe that few worked harder for their family, their faith and their friends thanEdmund Denis Casey. He will be sadly missed by many in Mackay and many throughout Queensland.

I would also like to pass on my condolences to the family of the late Roy Harvey. I want to expressmy thanks for his contributions to the Labor movement throughout his life, in this House and also in localgovernment.

Hon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing)(10.17 am): There would be no better tribute to Edmund Casey than what we have just heard—and hewould have taken just about as long to make it! The minister left out a couple of ‘too as well’s’ and ‘at thisparticular point in time’s’, which were trademarks of Ed’s wonderful contributions, witty and otherwise,venomous to Tories and always very much to the point but taking a long time to get there. Tim hascertainly done Edmund Denis Casey very proud here today.


I last saw Ed Casey alive at Tim’s home, where Tim’s family threw open their home to the cabinetwhen we met there on the eve of Cyclone Larry. I sat down with Ed and I said, ‘Would you like a drink,Ed?’, and he said, ‘Yeah, if you’re paying’—another of his trademarks. I had great joy in shouting him adrink. We had a good yarn and, of course, as always, he was rubbishing the Tories. From up there,looking down today and seeing the Tories praise him, he would have a smile on his face.

Edmund Casey was one of those people who proved that sometimes the Labor in politicsconvention can get it wrong, but the branches always get it right. The reason he succeeded in 1972 andagain in 1974 was that he took the local Labor people with him. I remember Gerry Jones, who was thenthe party organiser, coming to our home on the way to Mackay and talking with my father about luringEd back into the party. One thing passed on at the time was that in the whole time that he sat on thecrossbench he never once voted against the Labor opposition. Really, it was not a hard road to bringhim back. His heart and soul never, ever moved from the Labor Party, right up to the very end, as themember for Mackay has said.

Ed had an extraordinary wealth of information—no doubt about that—and he was fond of sharingthat with everybody. I do not know how he would survive in this day and age with the three-minute limitfor answers for ministers. However, having spent all of his time on his beloved subject of primaryindustries, when he became the minister he certainly made sure that everybody in the chamber got toknow about it. He brought passion and respect to that portfolio. Once, the opposition callously portrayedhim with a pink umbrella in a drought. He got a laugh out of that because that was his nature. He had agreat sense of a humour.

He had a fondness for brandy and cigars but there was no silver-tailed nature about him. He wasa very down-to-earth Labor man and a man of his times. He was a product of a very strong Labor family.

Laurie and the rest of the family have lost an excellent provider, someone who cared very muchabout his family and about his community. From a Labor point of view, we have lost somebody who hasbeen a stalwart all his life. When ill health forced him out of this parliament, parliament lost one of itscharacters.

Smiling down from Labor heaven, Ed, I say to you that the world is a poorer place for yourpassing. I say to Ed’s family that the grief that they are experiencing is grief that is felt by people such asmy parents and Tom Burns. I spoke to Tom earlier this morning and he wanted recorded the excellentcontribution that Ed made.

I say to Roy Harvey’s wife, Pearl, that it is ironic that today we are farewelling two iconic Laborpeople. Roy was a bloke who stuck with it through thick and thin. He made an enormous contribution tothe Labor Party. It was always difficult once Clem Jones left the council to find anybody who was goingto keep going. Frank Sleeman picked up the reins and that then left a big hole for Roy to fill, but he did itvery well. I remember the 60 Minutes program which portrayed him as somebody who was very down toearth. That is what he was. Right to the very end he never, ever forgot where he came from. I saw himrecently on the Sunshine Coast and he was still as adamant a Labor supporter and as interested inpolitics as he ever was.

I say to Pearl and her family that the Labor Party is a poorer place for the passing of Roy Harveyand, indeed, your grief is something that is shared by us all. Rest in peace, those two old comrades.

Mr NUTTALL (Sandgate—ALP) (10.21 am): My memory of Ed is as an old Labor warhorse. Mymemories and association with Ed go back to the seventies. I was a young bank Johnny who had beentransferred to Mackay to work in the bank. I had an avid interest in the trade union movement and theLabor Party and I remember going to see Ed. Ed was really the first contact I had in terms of trying tojoin the Labor Party at the time. Let me tell members, it was difficult to join the party at that time.

Ed will be well remembered for a number of things—pioneering safari suits would probably beone of those. Ed was a great supporter of the safari suit. But he was a great Labor man and from theyears that I lived in Mackay I know how highly regarded he was. I knew some of his children throughrefereeing Rugby League football. Some of his boys were quite good footballers, actually. The town ofMackay can be very, very proud of Ed as someone who worked very hard to represent them and Laborsupporters in general in this parliament. He came back to lead the party after having left in difficultcircumstances and that shows the strength of the man.

I also remember that when I first came into this parliament I spoke with Ed about the joys of beingin the ministry and the joys of actually sitting on the government benches. He spent many, many a yearon the other side of the parliament and was very poorly treated by the government of the day, but thatstory is for another time. It is the strength of character of the man to come back and lead the party; thestrength of character of the man that when he was defeated in the leadership as opposition leader hestayed with the party; the strength of character of the man that when he became a minister in thegovernment he showed strong support for the leader of the day, Wayne Goss, and strong support for theportfolio of primary industries. To me, he was the epitome of a strong Labor man and someone that Ialways held in the highest regard.


In terms of Roy Harvey, recently I was visiting a friend of mine who was telling me a story aboutRoy having asked him to run for preselection for council and how Roy had such a passion for trying toensure that we had good councillors representing the people in the Brisbane City Council. Roy was alsoa great Labor stalwart. They were very, very difficult times and I think that many of us tend to forget thatbecause we have had the joys of being in government for a long period of time. I understand what thePremier was saying in relation to the reforms that were instigated to get us where we are today, but weshould never forget people such as Ed Casey and Roy Harvey who worked so hard for this party to putus into the position that we are in today. To the families of those gentlemen I offer my sincerecondolences and may they both rest in peace.

Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (10.25 am): When Edmund Casey passed away on LabourDay, Queensland farewelled one of its finest citizens and we in the Labor family closed a page on animportant and defining part of our history.

Edmund Casey was first elected to the Queensland parliament in 1969. He endured the pain oflosing Labor Party endorsement but went on to prove the error of this action when he was twice electedas an Independent in the seat of Mackay. When the Bjelke-Petersen government received landslidesupport in the election of 1974 and the Labor Party was reduced to the famous cricket team, Ed Caseyheld his seat of Mackay with an increased majority. Soon after this, the selection moves were made toheal old wounds and Edmund became the shadow minister for primary industries in the Labor Party.

As many members know, I was not born into Labor politics. My father was, around this time, amember of the then Country Party but despite his suspicions of Labor politics he always held Ed Caseyin the highest regard. He thought Edmund was a man of integrity and someone who was willing to getout of George Street and listen to what country folk had to say. This sentiment was shared by many ruralpeople who, although never having voted Labor in their lives, respected Ed Casey for his genuineinterest in their opinions and the integrity he displayed as a person.

Edmund went on to become Leader of the Opposition and then Minister for Primary Industries inthe Goss government. I have no doubt that in this role Edmund did much to reconcile rural people withthe Labor Party, which in turn explains how Labor ultimately came to win and hold seats likeWhitsunday. Ed was, of course, a great champion of the sugar industry and he continues to berespected in these circles in my electorate today.

Although I had not known Edmund until relatively recent times, I do know that he was agentleman in every sense of the word. I will always treasure the words of advice and support given tome by Edmund. I also know that Edmund Casey had a well-developed sense of humour. My sister, whohelped nurse him on his return to the Mater Hospital in Mackay recently, mentioned to him that she wasmy sister. He began to chuckle and tell her that he had always dreamed of sending me a bunch offlowers with a card saying that they were from De-Anne Kelly.

It is hard for me to imagine Edmund without also imagining his life companion and wife, Laurie.They have been a formidable team through all the tough times that politics and ill health brought to theirlives. They have been a team through the good times of raising six children and welcoming a veritabletribe of grandchildren. My heart goes out to Laurie and the Casey family who have lost the familypatriarch, the centre of their universe. I pass on today my heartfelt sympathy for that loss. EdmundCasey will be sorely missed by his family, his friends and by the community that he served so well for solong.

Mr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (10.27 am): On behalf of the Kedron Stafford communityand the ALP members, in particular, of the Kedron branch I pay my respects to Roy Harvey and to hisfamily. Previous speakers have mentioned his formal contribution to civic life so I will speak briefly aboutthe man. I did not know Roy personally but local residents and party members from the Kedron arearemember him with fondness. His two daughters, Janelle and Marcia, and son Noel spoke lovingly oftheir father at the City Hall memorial service. Roy was a true Kedron boy and was enrolled at KedronState School in just its second year. He lived in Homebush Road, Kedron, for most of his married lifewith the love of his life, Pearl. He was a master tanner working in one of the many tanneries in theStafford-Kedron area for which the area was well known.

Roy was a keen fisherman—a very keen fisherman—and his daughters, Janelle and Marcia,recounted stories of them huddling under cover in a small boat in the bay while Roy enjoyed thepleasures that only a keen fisherman could enjoy as they became more drenched and more wanting tobe at home in the comforts of their bed.

His family spoke lovingly of the family holidays that they spent camping in various parts of south-east Queensland, in particular in the Sunshine Coast area to which Roy and Pearl retired. Roy wasfamous for his magical medicinal cures for all sorts of ills, and cod liver oil and malt was his favourite.His daughters recounted how he would gulp down a portion of this magic potion before administeringthe dose to his reluctant but uncomplaining children. Roy also had a sweet tooth and lollies formed apart of his life. The magical sweets cupboard was a favourite with his grandchildren.


ALP members met in his home, and last night a gathering of the Kedron branch members paidtheir respects to him. An ALP member to whom I have spoken talked of the warmth of Roy’s interest intheir families and his ability to get on with people from all backgrounds. In fact, his ability to get on withpeople is reflected by the fact that Roy, who was a very keen mason, went to one of the local Franciscanfriars, Father Leo, to get some public-speaking lessons to help him in his public life. One of the long-timeparty members, Ted Faulkner, said that it is going to be his privilege later tonight to be printing Hansardat the government printer’s office for this condolence motion.

When one of the local branch members was going to the Townsville state conference, Roy said,‘Son, you vote the way you want to vote according to your own way of thinking.’ He was veryaccommodating of various points of view. His friend and fellow Brisbane city councillor Brian Mellifontspoke glowingly of Roy’s contribution to public life. Roy made a huge contribution to public life,particularly, as has been pointed out by previous speakers, in the Brisbane City Council and in his shorttime as the member for Stafford. Former state secretary of the party Terry Hampson said that he was avery decent man.

I pass on my condolences to Pearl and to the Harvey family. I also pass on to Ed Casey’s widow,Laurie, a special word of thanks from my wife, Trish. When Trish first participated in the Premier’scommunity welfare committee in the early nineties, Laurie was one of those members’ spouses whowas very kind to Trish in making her feel a part of the group. I pay my respects to both families.

Hon. KW HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) (10.31 am): It is with great sadness that I speak to thiscondolence motion for two great Labor people. I have met Roy Harvey on only a few occasions, but Iknow his son Noel quite well and we meet and talk often. My condolences go to the Harvey family.Edmund Denis Casey I knew very well and spent a lot of time with. He was known as Edmund to me,Edmund Denis to some people, Ed to others and Eddie to a few as well. I was fond of him and I enjoyedhis company.

What can you say in these condolence motions? The member for Rockhampton spoke earlier ofEdmund Casey and recounted some stores about him. I know a lot of stories about Edmund. I waspersonally involved with him particularly during the period from 1986, when I was first elected, to 1989,when we came into government. There are a lot of stories about Edmund, but all of them are good. Tome, what came through about Edmund was his diligence and his determination.

What I first noticed about Edmund Casey when I came into parliament was how hardworking hewas as an opposition member of this parliament. I am not sure whether or not it is true—I guess it isrecorded in history—but I was led to believe that by 1989 Edmund Casey was the longest servingopposition member of parliament in a Western democracy, which tells you about the time that he spentin opposition in this parliament. It is a long time from when he was first elected.

It has been spoken about before that primary industry was a passion of Edmund’s. I served on theshadow primary industries committee with him. He treated that committee and the task that he had asshadow minister for primary industries very seriously. He travelled extensively throughoutQueensland—as members have said, he was very fond of saying ‘up and down the length and breadthof Queensland’—often with committee members extolling Labor’s approach to primary industry. Herarely spoke to an audience that was converted. It was often two steps forward and one step back.

The Premier spoke earlier about Edmund’s passion. He certainly was passionate. He waspassionate about this parliament, he was passionate about his politics and he was passionate about hisfamily, but what stood out to me was his persistence and his diligence—his determination to the task.Think about how long he was in opposition and what it is like to be a shadow minister over that period oftime.

I want to tell the House a story about him which demonstrates the difficulty of being in oppositionas a shadow minister. I remember travelling with him and other committee members—I think themember for Inala, Henry Palaszczuk, was one of them. We went up the coast of Queensland with thepurpose of meeting every mill owner, mill suppliers group and cane grower executive, starting fromBrisbane to Nambour right through to Mossman. That was the plan. We started in Brisbane. We went tomeeting after meeting and finally into the Mourilyan district on federal budget day. It is the same day, ina sense, because the federal budget is to be brought down tonight. I will never forget it. At the meetingin Mourilyan the chairman of the Mourilyan cane growers association listened to what Edmund had tosay. The meeting went on and on. We have to remember that at the time a federal Labor governmentwas in power. He said, ‘Whatever happens in this federal budget, what must not happen is the embargoon imported sugar must not be lifted.’

It means nothing to us now but at the time you could not import sugar into Australia. It was morean icon issue because the reality was that we were a net exporter—a very serious exporter of sugar. Ithink 90 per cent of our crop was exported, but there was this issue of not importing sugar. Edmundstrongly agreed, as only Edmund could. He made his view very clear that the embargo must stay. Hesaid that this would not happen and that would not happen. By that evening the budget announced thatthe embargo was gone. I see the member for Mirani nodding, because he would remember the time.Edmund observed to me that night, and it is something that has always stuck with me, and I guess it is

09 May 2006 Questions Without Notice 1443

something that can stick with an opposition, that it is often not very helpful to have a federal governmentof your own political colour. That was a grim old night. That announcement put our tour and meetingsinto disarray, believe me. This is my point about Edmund Casey and his diligence and determination.Despite that setback, Edmund fronted the mill suppliers meeting in Cairns the next morning. Theyturned up the next morning and they gave it to him. He simply wore it. Despite the work and the effortthat he put in, in this particular case there was one step forward and two steps back.

Edmund gave me much advice, some of which I took notice of and some of which I did not. Hewas a guy who would provide advice if asked and even if not asked. I had the honour of working withhim in the Wayne Goss cabinet. He introduced me to two people whom I know and who will remainlifelong friends of mine—the member for Mackay, Tim Mulherin and Graham Davies. Every year thethree of us, along with the member for Southport, tour various country areas throughout Queensland.My condolences go to Edmund’s wife, Laurie, and their family. He will be sadly missed.

Motion agreed to, honourable members standing in silence.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Water SupplyMr SPRINGBORG (10.39 am): My question without notice is to the minister for natural resources.

I refer to the government’s self-created water crisis, caused by eight years of systematic and systemicneglect of water infrastructure in Queensland, and to my budget reply speech of 2004 in which Iindicated a commitment to a $1 billion water supply strategy.

A government member interjected. Mr SPRINGBORG: He is so rude. Water is an important issue. Does the minister agree with the

comments of his predecessor, Stephen Robertson, at the time that ‘building dams was just simply 1950sdinosaur thinking’?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Let us just get everything into perspective. The south-east Queensland watersupply strategy is not only about dams because dams are not the only solution. To give south-eastQueensland an adequate supply of water we need to do the following: we need to build dams. We havea proposal for two new dams.

Opposition members interjected. Mr PALASZCZUK: Wait a moment. And we need to build a desalination plant. That is on the

supply side. And we have to look at retrofitting to save water. And we have to look at the recycling of ourwater. And we have to look at saving water in industry and in the commercial area. The solution tosouth-east Queensland’s water problems is not in one area—dams—which is what the memberopposite is on about. His solution to south-east Queensland’s water problems is to build the WyaralongDam. He has said that he wants to build it in three years. Last week he said that he wants to build it infive years. Previously with his Caboolture region candidate he said 10 years. When I look at his 1997water infrastructure plan I see that he was not going to build it later than 2030. Where does thehonourable Leader of the Opposition stand on water infrastructure in Queensland? He stands nowhere.

A government member: High and dry. Mr PALASZCZUK: High and dry. Let us contrast that to what our government is doing: over

$400 million has been committed to water infrastructure projects immediately—over $400 million. Weare the only government to build the Paradise Dam. Paradise Dam is the ninth largest dam inQueensland. Unlike the opposition, we build dams for water, not for votes as they used to do. They builtdams for votes. They built dams in the wrong areas. We are building dams in the right areas. We arebuilding dams for the right reasons. We are not just building dams, because overcoming south-eastQueensland’s water supply shortage requires a combination of all those things that I mentioned initially.

Water SupplyMr SPRINGBORG: My second question is to the minister for local government and environment.

I refer to the government’s self-created water crisis, brought about by eight years of neglect of essentialwater infrastructure and to her address to the Water Loss Task Force in February last year. She tolddelegates—Dams are a bloke’s thing. All these blokes keep ringing me up saying they want dams. They want big dams. I keep telling them it’sall about management.

Does the minister still agree that dams are just a bloke’s thing? Opposition members interjected. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I am fairly tolerant. There is a different Speaker in

the chair but, by the same token, I am not going to allow members not to be heard.

1444 Questions Without Notice 09 May 2006

Ms BOYLE: It is no surprise to the parliament and no wonder that those with environmentalinterests have some concerns and some reluctance about dams and their potential impacts on theenvironment. I have, of course, been following the debate quite widely, particularly the concernsexpressed by some locally about environmental matters. Nonetheless, I have to say to the Leader of theOpposition that the biggest environmental matter is climate change. From that, we come to a situation ofinsufficient water for south-east Queensland with its huge growth management and its huge pressures.There is no doubt that the dams in south-east Queensland are necessary, as the Minister for NaturalResources, Mines and Water said, as one of a raft of measures being taken by this government in orderto ensure a future supply of potable water for south-east Queensland.

Nonetheless, I provide some reassurance to those who are concerned about environmentalimpacts that the Environmental Protection Agency will be at the table, that the proper environmentalimpact studies will be done and that I will be joining with other ministers, particularly with myresponsibility as environment minister, in looking into those impacts and mitigating them so far as ispossible.

The hard facts are that we need to catch the rain where it falls. Climate change predictions arealso that when we have rain as these years go on it will bucket down in very heavy downpours ratherthan be spread more gently across the region. I, therefore, support the minister for natural resourcesand his departmental studies that say that these are the two sites that should be most sensiblyinvestigated for dams in the future. I, nonetheless, give recognition to all members here as well as to thebroader public of Queensland that these dams are not sufficient action, that we still need to take actionin terms of the use of recycled water by industry, in terms of housing sustainability measures, in terms ofgreywater and also in terms of rainwater tanks.

Federal Budget

Ms BARRY: My question without notice is to the Premier. Tonight the Treasurer, Peter Costello,will hand down his federal budget. What should Queenslanders expect?

Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for the question. I might just say that I am one ofthe blokes ringing the minister for environment about the two dams we are going to build. I canunderstand the Deputy Premier’s support. She is not a bloke, but she is just as enthusiastic as I amabout the two dams. We are going to build the two dams and members opposite can go and whinge allthey like. The fact is that we are going to build them. They can talk and whinge about it, but we are goingto do it. They should stop wasting their time.

I do want to say one thing seriously before I start. As honourable members know, ministerialstatements were not made this morning. However, I know that the Leader of the Opposition and all othermembers will join me in expressing our joy and relief that Todd Russell and Brant Webb have not onlysurvived their ordeal of 14 nights underground but have walked out unharmed and in good spirits. Iknow that every member of this House is absolutely delighted. I wish them well. However, we shouldremember today that, tragically, Larry Knight lost his life, and his funeral will be held this afternoon. Ithink we should pass on our condolences to his widow, his children and his family.

Let me come back to the question. Tonight the federal Treasurer will bring down his budget. Thereis a surplus of around $17.5 billion. One thing I know is that Australians deserve that money back. Oneof the areas in which we want to see that money invested is health. We have invested an additional$6.4 billion over the next five years in the health action plan. Because of that increased funding, weneed a matching amount from the Commonwealth of $1.6 billion. Tonight is the opportunity for PeterCostello to give us the money that Queenslanders are entitled to. We are the growth state of Australia.We have an additional 1,500 people moving to Queensland every week. We are entitled to the money. Imake no apology for that.

Secondly, I would like to see the federal Treasurer fund those additional training places fordoctors at our universities. There is no excuse for not training enough Australian doctors. I find itabsolutely unacceptable—and so do members of my government—that we are not training enoughAustralians to look after Australians. I know that there has been some criticism from those oppositeabout the campaign we ran to pressure the Prime Minister to bring in more HECS places.

I make no apology for that. We ran ads in newspapers around the state and in the Australian. Itcost around $50,000. We are going to continue to pressure the Prime Minister because nowhere alongthe line have I seen any effort from the opposition—they are in the same political party—to raise this.Not once have those opposite raised it. Not once have they talked to the Prime Minister about extraplaces. All they do is whinge, whinge, whinge. If they are not involved in something improper they areout there whingeing, whingeing, whingeing. Not once did they do anything. Those opposite standcondemned. I have never heard them once get out and do anything about it.


Stafford, Development ApplicationMr QUINN: My question is directed to the Minister for the Environment, Local Government,

Planning and Women. I refer to the minister’s decision to use her ministerial call-in powers for reasonsof state interest in relation to a development application for an aged-care facility on land owned by thestate government at Stafford. This proposal was rejected by the Brisbane City Council, including by ALPcouncillors, due to environmental concerns and it not complying with the city plan, a plan approved byher government. Is not the only state interest involved in this application the $6.5 million the governmentwill receive when the sale of the land is finalised after she approves the development? Because thestate government is a direct beneficiary of the minister’s decision, is it not impossible to overcome thisas a conflict of interest?

Ms BOYLE: I thank the honourable member for this important question. There are, as he says,two reasons whereby a minister for planning may call in a development. The first is where there areconcerns about its conformity with the council’s planning scheme and the second is where there is astate interest. There is no doubt that there is a huge interest in this particular development.

There are those who are suggesting that it is a conflict of interest. There is no conflict. It is a veryclear, direct state interest. The land is in the ownership of the state government. It is under the care ofthe Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing. It has therefore been targeted for housing. If indeedit is not to be directly used for public housing it will be used for a Blue Care facility for sorely neededaged-care beds. That is indeed a state interest. I am sure the honourable member would know, as otherhonourable members would know, that in our public hospital system there are very many people whoare waiting in beds for placement in nursing homes. It is a very clear state interest.

I have to say that this matter is somewhat of a mess. The Brisbane City Council has taken variouspositions on this over time. First of all, it wanted no development on the site, then it only wanted somedevelopment and then the minister for public works and housing some time ago gave the council thechance to use the green levy that it applied to Brisbane residents to purchase it—and at a reduced priceI might say—and the council chose not to purchase it. Now, would you mind, there are mixed positionsbetween the Lord Mayor and one of the councillors!

There are very many petitioners who are against the development and many petitioners who arein favour of the development. It is quite appropriate in the circumstances—that is, with a strong stateinterest and with so much conflict and confusion around the development—that I as planning minister docall it in and sort it out.

Mr Terry Sullivan: Tell the over-70s that.Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! The member for Stafford, that is grossly disorderly. Mr Terry Sullivan: They just hate aged care. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! I warn you under standing order 253.

Cyclone Larry, Relief AppealMr WALLACE: My question without notice is to the Premier. Now that far-north Queenslanders

are starting to get back on their feet can the Premier provide an update on the progress of the CycloneLarry Relief Appeal.

Mr BEATTIE: I thank the member for Thuringowa for his question. I am pleased to report that theCyclone Larry Relief Appeal has passed the $18 million mark. This is a significant achievement. I wouldlike to once again thank everyone who has contributed to this worthy cause. The money has been usedto provide direct assistance to people hit hard by this devastating natural disaster. Through the firstwave of assistance under this fund we are providing up to $2,000 in cash grants to those people whosehomes are uninhabitable.

More than 1,200 applications have been received for this assistance and cheques have alreadybeen paid out to 113 people. In addition, another 400 cheques are expected to be in the post by the endof the week. A number of other applications are in the process of being assessed by the seven localsubcommittees set up in each of the affected shires of Johnstone, Cairns, Cardwell, Mareeba,Herberton, Atherton and Eacham. These subcommittees comprise local community members—peoplein the best position to make local decisions on local need. The reason for that is very simple. Peoplehave given money in trust and we have to ensure that it gets to the people who are in greatest need.Having local people involved ensures that happens.

The chair of the relief appeal, Terry Mackenroth, has provided details on the second wave offinancial assistance to be provided from the appeal. Money will be made available to eligible applicantsfor the repair of structural damage to owner-occupied residences. This assistance is separate to anyother assistance that may have been provided by the Department of Communities to repair structuraldamage or under phase 1 of the appeal. The money is intended to assist people suffering financial


hardship and who have limited capacity to recover from the effects of Cyclone Larry. Tomorrow’sadvertisements will appear in local newspapers outlining details of the next phase of financialassistance. I table a copy of the application form.

I take this opportunity to once again thank Terry and members of his various committees for thehard work they are doing to help administer the appeal fund. Terry is doing a terrific job in difficultcircumstances. The comments by the opposition leader regarding his appointment were disgraceful andunwarranted. It was an outrageous attack on someone who is no longer a member of parliament andwho has given up his time on a voluntary basis, without pay, to help the victims of Cyclone Larry.

The Cyclone Larry Relief Appeal is providing a helping hand to Queenslanders in need. It isproviding real assistance to help people rebuild their lives and rebuild their communities. I wouldencourage everyone to keep the victims of Cyclone Larry in their hearts and minds and to keep giving tothe relief appeal.

I also take this opportunity to thank General Cosgrove and other members of the task force. As Ihave reported recently, John Mulcahy has joined Sandy Hollway and Ross Rolfe from my department.They are working incredibly hard and they deserve the thanks of all Queensland.

Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the honourable member for Warrego, I welcome tothe public gallery teachers and students from McDowall State School in the electorate of the minister foreducation.

Montville, Development ApplicationMr HOBBS: I have a question for the minister for local government. I refer the minister to—and

I am sure she can recall—the Premier’s frequent trips to Melbourne at taxpayers’ expense and costlyadvertising campaigns to attract business to Queensland. I also refer to her political decision to call inand reject the Montville Links development despite the development being signed off by the MaroochyShire Council and no objection to the final plan by the EPA. How does the minister expect the public, thedevelopers and investors to take Queensland seriously when she intervenes for political purposes toscuttle a $150 million development by a Victorian company that specialises in environmentalrehabilitation?

Ms BOYLE: What a ridiculous question that is. As a statement of fact for members, it was ofcourse the Premier who called in the Montville Links development and who presented a wise decision interms of the Montville Links development.

An incident having occurred in the public gallery—Ms BOYLE: It was a wise decision indeed because the south-east Queensland plan is for real.

We mean business in terms of that south-east Queensland plan. It was the Premier’s view, and quitecorrectly so, that 10 months after the SEQ plan had been adopted it was not at all proper to bring in adecision that did not take account of that plan. I noted this week that the opposition National Partyleader spoke out against the Montville Links development and it was breathtaking. He absolutelyrecalled the good old days and said, ‘This would not have happened under Joh Bjelke-Petersen.’ Itwould not have happened—

Mr SPRINGBORG: I rise to a point of order. My reputation has been besmirched. I find theminister’s comments offensive. I actually spoke out in favour of it. I would like the minister to correct therecord.

Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Will you withdraw? Ms BOYLE: I withdraw. For the record, there is no way that the decision would have been made

by Bjelke-Petersen. In fact, the opposition leader, as well as the member for Warrego who asked thisquestion, would not have taken the SEQ plan into account. Instead, they would do deals with theirbusiness mates. We would be back to the white-shoe brigade, to the brown paper bags and to decisionsmade on a wink and a nod with their mates. Well, not this government. There is a proper plan in place.We will oversee the councils to make sure they do the right thing. We will take account of the impactsand the proper order of planning. We will take on board community concerns and we will—

Mr Hobbs: Council supported it. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Member for Warrego, I warn you under standing order 253. Ms BOYLE: We will make good decisions for precious communities like Montville and other

communities in the hinterland. The Premier’s decision to refuse that development was widelywelcomed.

A further incident having occurred in the public gallery—Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! People in the public gallery have the privilege of attending this

parliament but they are not allowed to participate by booing or making comments. I will send someattendants to the public gallery. It is totally out of order. It is not allowed in our parliament.


Gold Coast Marine Development Project BoardMs CROFT: My question is to the Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for State Development,

Trade and Innovation. I am aware of the appointment and role of the Gold Coast Marine DevelopmentProject Board but it appears that others are not. Could the minister advise the House of the membershipof this very important board?

Ms BLIGH: I thank the member for Broadwater for her question and for her well-known interest inthe ongoing process to assess the final decision of the government in relation to the development of TheSpit. I know that she has been a keen observer of all of the stages of this process.

For the benefit of the House, I advise that the members of the board are Peter Isdale from theGreat Barrier Reef Research Foundation; Tom Fenwick, who is a former director-general of thedepartments of natural resources and primary industries; Annabelle Chaplain, who is the deputy chair ofSEQWater, and who was previously from the Ports Corporation of Queensland; Mark Reaburn, who is alife member of the Southport Surf Life Saving Club; and Gavin Litfin from the Office of the Coordinator-General.

Those members who have been observing this matter for some time may find some of that a littlefamiliar. I am very sorry that the member for Surfers Paradise has left the chamber. I am repeating thesenames because I was intrigued by a recent press release from the member for Surfers Paradise titled‘Langbroek seeks answers on secret cruise ship terminal board’. It states—Coalition member for Surfers Paradise, John Paul Langbroek, is asking for answers after the Beattie government mentioned aboard involved in the proposed cruise ship terminal at The Spit he had not heard of.

The press release states further—‘I have never heard of the Gold Coast marine development project board before,’ said Mr Langbroek. ‘I have now asked the Deputy Premier to reveal details of this board....‘The major issue here is how can the people of the Gold Coast lobby a board that the government has kept under wraps untilnow?’ he said.

The member for Surfers Paradise said that on 24 April this year. For the benefit of the detectiveon the other side of the House, I table the press release that I issued five months ago on 12 Decemberoutlining the board, its role and all of the appointments. I also table an article which appeared on page 6of the Gold Coast Bulletin the day after I issued the press release outlining in detail the membership ofthe board. It was clear that the journalist who wrote that article was listening on that day. I also table theministerial statement that I made on 9 March in which I mentioned the board, the press release that Iissued on 9 March in which I also mentioned the board, and the ministerial statement I made on 21 Aprilwhen I spoke about this incredibly secret board.

It seems that if you want to keep something hidden from the member for Surfers Paradise, youshould issue a press release and talk about it in the parliament, because that is one way of making surethat he does not have a clue that it is happening.

Mr Barton: He’s not here again now. So he’s still not. Ms BLIGH: Again, he is not in the place. It is not surprising that the member does not know what

is happening in his electorate. He is not taking his place in this parliament. He is a part-time member forthe seat of Surfers Paradise. All I can say to the member for Surfers Paradise is: keep up, man.

Traveston DamMiss ELISA ROBERTS: My question is for the Premier. In response to his announcement of a

substantial amount of money to compensate those who will be negatively affected by the proposedTraveston Dam, will that compensation also include those farmers who reside outside the Mary Valleyfurther along the Mary River whose access to water may be reduced as a result of the dam?

Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for her question. As I think the member would beaware, yesterday representatives from the department of natural resources met with the Cooloolacouncil. There was also other communication and departmental staff provided maps. The director-general has written to the people in the Traveston area who are likely to be affected. He has also writtento the people in the Tilley’s Bridge area who are likely to be affected.

Yesterday, the Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Water and I indicated that we wereimmediately making available $50 million to cover two things. In the Tilley’s Bridge area, money will bemade available to provide hardship payments. If someone had entered into a contract, we want them tobe able to complete that. I recall the member made a public statement after our visit to Gympie aboutsomeone who had entered into a contract for a property. This payment is designed to ensure that theperson to whom the member referred is able to complete that contract. We will make that moneyavailable. We will buy the land. We do not want to see people inconvenienced. The member will recallwhat she said publicly at the time.


I want to talk specifically about the member’s neck of the woods. We have made this moneyavailable not just in hardship cases for Traveston, because we have said that Traveston will be the siteunless some of the drilling or testing, which will start on 15 May, comes up with something about whichwe are not aware and which would require us to reconsider. At this point, we intend to go ahead withthat site subject to that drilling. The advice given to us by DNR would be that by mid-June—roughlyabout four weeks later—we will have the results of that drilling. We should be able to confirm the site.However, we are saying that anybody who is in the directly affected area can start negotiations with thegovernment immediately for the sale of their land and they will be paid market value.

In terms of the areas, obviously the drilling that is being done now will determine a range ofthings, such as the spread of water. Yesterday, in relation to Kandanga and Imbil, the minister and I saidthat the last thing we want is to see water affecting either of those communities. If the water, which willbe very shallow at that level, comes up the valley, we might able to put in a bund wall. Hopefully, we cando it in such a way that the water does not go to either Imbil or Kandanga.

To answer the member’s question specifically, that money will be available to anybody who wantsto negotiate with us on commercial terms to sell their land if they are affected by the dam. There aregoing to be some areas on the margin where we are not sure. We will err on the side of looking afterpeople. If someone is particularly stressed out because of these matters, we are prepared to discusspurchasing their property.

Yesterday in the meeting the Cooloola council asked for counselling support for the peopleinvolved. The departmental representatives agreed to do that and we will fund it.

Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Before calling the honourable member for Stafford, I welcome tothe public gallery students and teachers from McDowall State School, which is in the electorate of theMinister for Education and Minister for the Arts, and Cleveland State High School, which is in theCleveland electorate, represented by Mr Briskey.

Health System

Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: My question is directed to the Minister for Health. As the minister isaware, nurse Toni Hoffman indicated that she was forced to go public with her concerns about JayantPatel in Bundaberg after claiming that her pleas to Queensland Health management fell on deaf ears. Iask: can the minister inform the House what the government is doing to ensure that this does nothappen again?

Mr ROBERTSON: I thank the member for the question. We are not only making major inroadsinto recruiting more clinicians into our public health systems but also we are transforming the very healthsystem they are working in. Later today I will introduce a bill to establish a new independent healthwatchdog with more powers, more resources and more responsibilities than the current Health RightsCommission.

When this legislation commences in July, the Health Quality and Complaints Commission will bethe only body of its kind in Australia with the legislative power and resources to properly monitor andimprove the quality of our health services and oversee the management of consumer and staffcomplaints. The new commission will ensure that the inadequate handling of complaints at BundabergBase Hospital will never be repeated.

Under its expanded roles and powers, the Toni Hoffmans in our health system will have a reliable,independent body to turn to if they are not satisfied with how their complaints are addressed internally.The current Health Rights Commission never had authority to investigate staff complaints aboutsystemic issues regarding quality of safety, nor could it actively investigate registered healthpractitioners.

The goal of the new commission will be to assure our community that the quality of healthservices in Queensland is of the highest possible standard. It will provide oversight of the quality ofactivities in all health services, not just in Queensland Health but also across the private sector. This willinvolve making or adopting any new best practice standards across all aspects of health services,assessing the performance of services and meeting those standards, and making anyrecommendations for improvement. It will also involve monitoring and reporting on the quality ofservices and investigating any matters of concern I refer as health minister to the commission itself.

The commission will receive and manage complaints in a reasonable time frame, investigate andreconcile complaints and help health service providers develop procedures to effectively resolvecomplaints. Other functions of the commission include providing a supportive environment in whichconsumers can have their questions or concerns addressed, undertaking research, recommendingnominees for district health council membership and providing reports to parliament on matters relatingto health services and the commission’s activities.


As I recently announced, an expressions of interest process to appoint a governing body for thecommission has already commenced. I expect that a commissioner and between five and sevenassistant commissioners will be appointed before the commission starts operations in July, as well as anacting chief executive officer.

This is one of our government’s most significant milestones to date in creating a more open andtransparent health system which is restoring public confidence and revitalising the public health servicein Queensland.

Water SupplyMr SEENEY: My question without notice is to the Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and

Water. I refer the minister to all of these documents which I will list and table. The first is question onnotice No. 1397, regarding potential future water storage sites; question on notice No. 1412, regardingfuture water infrastructure; the South East Queensland Regional Water Supply Strategy 2004—whichthe minister is no doubt familiar with—

Mr Beattie: Why don’t you just table them?Mr SEENEY: Maybe you would like to read them as well—the South East Queensland Regional

Water Supply Strategy Stage 2, tabled in January 2006; the Queensland Water Plan 2005-2010,presented in August 2005; and the South East Queensland Infrastructure Plan and Program 2005-2026.Not one of those documents even mentions the Traveston Dam or the Rathdowney Dam as a potentialwater infrastructure site. Can the minister explain to the parliament the process that his departmentused to identify those two sites as his preferred options when they have not even been listed as possibleoptions for the last 12 years?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I refer the honourable member to the South East Queensland Regional WaterSupply Strategy. It lists possible longer term measures—‘Investigate Mary River water storageimprovements’ and ‘Investigate as part of SEQRWSS and beyond’. You have to read the whole page.The note states—Medium and longer-term actions are subject to the outcomes of more detailed investigation as the South East QueenslandRegional Water Supply Strategy is further progressed. Project design and delivery will depend on outcomes of technical, social,economic and environmental investigations.

The Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Water, in conjunction with South EastQueensland Water and the local councils, has been investigating those sites for quite a while. Withclimate change and our growing population, we need bigger dams in conjunction with the othermeasures I mentioned in answer to the first question I received from the honourable member.

We are going through the worst drought in 100 years. We are working with the 18 local councils todevelop a region-wide water supply blueprint. In years gone by when we spoke about providing waterfor an area such as south-east Queensland we used the conjunction ‘or’—‘You build either a dam orhave recycled water or retrofitting.’ Today because of climate change we have to use the conjunction‘and’. Not only must we do all those things such as have regional water grids, recycled water schemesand desalination; we also need new water storages and water-saving initiatives.

As part of the work to develop that strategy many potential dam sites in the region have beenconsidered. The Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Water recommended to the governmentthat further investigations of the Traveston and Tilley’s Bridge dam sites be conducted. Dams built onthese sites are projected to provide 150,000-plus megalitres of water, which is a third of the water beingused by south-east Queensland currently. Why are you against megadams?

Water SupplyMr LIVINGSTONE: My question is to the Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Water. I refer

the minister to the government’s plan to secure south-east Queensland future water supplies. Whatprogress is being made to secure additional water and conserve existing water supplies?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I have good news for Queensland. Dr Flegg: Hope it’s better than your last one.Mr PALASZCZUK: The member should ask me a question and I will come back at him. Today I

have announced that the Queensland government is signing another—Dr Flegg interjected. Mr PALASZCZUK: It goes back to 1989—agreement to conserve water in the south-east corner.

The government is committing $6 million over four years to the south-east Queensland irrigation futures.It will operate in an area from Noosa in the north to west of Toowoomba and south to the New SouthWales border. The program is a partnership of Queensland Dairyfarmers’ Organisation, Growcom, theQueensland Flower Growers Association, Queensland Turf Producers Association and the south-east


Queensland catchments. It would be supported by research and development for the CRC for IrrigationFutures and other research and development organisations. More than $3.5 million has been committedto directly assist irrigators and a further $2.5 million is in support of research and development and otherinitiatives.

The program aims to achieve a 10 per cent reduction in irrigation water use across the region bythe year 2009, equivalent of about 30 billion litres or about 30,000 megalitres. The program will includefield demonstrators on better irrigation management, irrigation systems efficiency assessments, fieldtrials and workshops, extension services, the development of an information package and a financialincentive scheme to assist irrigators to upgrade or replace inefficient irrigation schemes.

Further to that, we are also working in partnership with our local councils. Just recently thePremier and I signed with the 18 local councils an $80 million agreement to reduce water losses fromwater main breaks and by reducing pressure. This program is expected to save more than 20,000megalitres of water each year.

We are getting on with the job. We are working as hard as we can to ensure that south-eastQueensland has a secure water supply. Our only hope is that members opposite would agree with us. Iwould like to know where members of the Liberal Party stand on all of this. They have been silent so faron the two proposed dams, unlike members of the National Party, who have been very, very vocal, Iexpect in their opposition to these two proposals.

Their answer is the Wyaralong Dam, which will provide around 21,000 to 24,000 megalitres ofwater. We will have an increase in population in south-east Queensland of around a million people overthe next 20 years. We need that extra water. We need those two dams.

Rathdowney Dam

Mr LINGARD: I direct my question to the minister for natural resources, and I ask: how would theminister feel if he were a fourth generation successful farmer at Rathdowney and last week he saw thePremier on TV announcing a dam that would inundate his property? Despite what the Premier has said,today—six days later—those people have not received even one word of communication from thegovernment. How would the minister feel about the government’s consultation process if he was thatfarmer?

Mr PALASZCZUK: When we speak about the proposed dam at Tilley’s Bridge, the governmenthas not made a decision. However, we have been up-front with the people in that area. We have toldthem that there is a choice between Tilley’s Bridge and Wyaralong. The government’s preferred site isTilley’s Bridge because it has a larger capacity than Wyaralong Dam. However, that is not a foregoneconclusion. We are still conducting detailed investigations there. The people who live in that area willknow by the middle of June what is the government’s decision.

Certainly this is traumatic for the people who live not only in the Tilley’s Bridge area but also in theTraveston and Mary Valley areas. I know many of the people who live in the Mary Valley and I knowsome of the people who live in the Tilley’s Bridge area, and I know how difficult this is for them.However, at the end of the day, we really need to look at what is happening in south-east Queenslandand how we can secure an adequate supply of water for people in south-east Queensland.

When the coalition government was in power back in the seventies, members opposite facedexactly the same problem when the Wivenhoe Dam was built. The Wivenhoe Dam was not built tosupply water for south-east Queensland, although that is what it is used for now. It was built as aprotection from flood for the people in the Brisbane and Ipswich areas after the devastating flood of1974. The conservative government then was faced with the same situation as we currently face. Thegovernment had to make a decision. The good agricultural land and the environmental issues—all thoseissues—had to be taken into account by the members opposite, and the Wivenhoe Dam was built.People were displaced, but they were displaced for the good of the majority.

Unfortunately, whilst we really sympathise with the people who live in those two valleys, we needto consider the good of the majority of people who live in south-east Queensland. In order to have anadequate supply of water, we need to build dams and we need to do all those other things that I havementioned in my two previous answers.

Mr Lingard: You should have contacted them.

Mr PALASZCZUK: For the information of the honourable member, letters have been sent to thepeople who live in the Tilley’s Bridge and Traveston areas. They have received a letter that was sent on8 May. There is a question and answer—

Time expired.


Pacific Motorway UpgradeMrs REILLY: I direct my question to the Minister for Transport and Main Roads. Can the minister

inform the House of planned upgrades to the Pacific Motorway—the main road connectingQueensland’s two largest cities, Brisbane and the Gold Coast—and inform the House as to theimpediments that are delaying this vital work from proceeding?

Mr LUCAS: I thank the honourable member for her question. The honourable member, like theother Gold Coast members, is assiduous in advancing the interests of the Pacific Motorway, as is themember for Springwood in relation to her section.

There are five impediments—four dud federal Liberal members and a state Liberal shadowtransport spokesperson who—unlike the member for Gregory when he was a transport spokesperson—will not stand up to Canberra.

Mr Caltabiano interjected.Mr LUCAS: Every time the Pacific Motorway is raised, he is just like Santo Santoro—happy to

interject but never takes interjections himself. That is what happens when one has an ego like themember for Chatsworth.

When it comes to road funding sixteen percent of federal fuel taxes are returned to Australianmotorists. What is the difference between the Pacific Motorway in Queensland and the Pacific Motorwayin New South Wales? One hundred and sixty million dollars per year over 10 years for federal roadfunding on a 50-50 basis. Why is it that the federal Liberals on the Gold Coast are so ineffectual—soineffectual—that, apart from a $120 million commitment for the Tugun bypass in 2003, there has beenno federal road funding for major projects on the Gold Coast since then?

The Gold Coast is Queensland’s second largest city and it is an economic powerhouse, but thefederal government will not provide 50-50 funding. The Gold Coast deserves a fair share in tonight’sbudget. Why is it that work on the Mudgeeraba interchange cannot be done? Because the opposition’sside of politics will not do it. What is the disgrace? If the opposition will not stand up to the federalgovernment when it wants people’s votes, what would ever happen to the people on the Gold Coast ifthey had a Liberal-National government in this state? They would be left high and dry because no-onewould be prepared to argue their case.

I hope that Labor wins the next federal election, but I will say this: this side of the House will takeon Canberra, regardless of who is in power, because we want a fair share for Queensland. That is ahallmark of the Beattie government. All that the opposition spokesperson has done is complain aboutland resumptions. We will get on with the job of planning and designing so that if and when—God helpus—we receive some money from the federal government for the M1, we can actually get straight intodesign and construction.

There is a whole range of projects. The M1 between Nerang and Tugun is in desperate need ofan upgrade. However, it is also in desperate need of leadership from federal representatives on theGold Coast. Our state representatives were successful in getting the $392 million on the table for 50-50funding, which is sitting in my pocket, ready to be spent as soon as we have a commitment from thefederal government. The federal duds on the Gold Coast obviously emulate the member for Currumbin,who is a great dud herself and has done nothing about the Tugun bypass—

Mrs STUCKEY: I rise to a point of order.Mr ACTING SPEAKER: I think that was unparliamentary and I ask the minister to withdraw it.

Withdraw your comments about the member for Currumbin.Mrs STUCKEY: I ask the minister to withdraw—Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Yes. That is okay.Mr LUCAS: I withdraw.

Traveston DamMr CHRIS FOLEY: I direct my question without notice to the Premier. When I heard the news

about the Traveston Dam, I had to pinch myself to make sure that it was not the first of April. Thisproposal is an absolute joke. It will kill off the Mary River downstream from the dam, wreck fishing inHervey Bay and wipe out some of the best farmland in the state. This is environmental vandalism of theworst kind.

Mr McNamara interjected. Mr CHRIS FOLEY: I take that interjection from the member for Hervey Bay. He should be very,

very keenly opposing this dam due to the impact it will have on fisheries.I ask the Premier: if the dams that feed water to Brisbane are down to 30 per cent capacity and

lower, how will building a dam that will take five to 12 years to build and fill help the immediate problem?Why is the Premier prepared to damage downstream communities to satisfy the unbridled demands ofthe south-east corner? This is dumb state environmentalism.


Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Can I suggest to the member for Maryborough that yourpreamble be a bit shorter in future. You finally got around to asking the question, but it was a little bitlate.

Mr BEATTIE: Just taking out the abuse and inappropriate tones of the question, let me answer it. An honourable member interjected. Mr BEATTIE: I am happy to do that. The reality is very simple. The proposal at Traveston not only

will provide water for the south-east corner but also will stop floods in both Gympie and Maryborough. Iwould have thought that the member for Maryborough would be in here supporting some constructiveproposals rather than trying to scaremonger and introduce all sorts of irrelevancies that simply have nobasis in fact. The member has no basis for any one of the allegations that he made about the effects ofthe dam. They are absolutely without foundation. I would have thought the member would have actuallyhad some basis for it. If he has a basis for making those claims—

Mr CHRIS FOLEY: I rise to a point of order. The Premier is misleading the House. There aremany, many demonstrable environmental issues—

Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Resume your seat. There is no point of order. Honourablemembers, I have said previously when I have been in the chair that frivolous points of order will not beallowed. In fact, they are disorderly. All it does is interfere with the person on their feet answering aquestion. That was a frivolous point of order.

Mr BEATTIE: My challenge is simple: if the member has them, table them now. Mr Seeney interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Do you mind? This is not the member’s question. Come on, don’t be rude. This is

his question, not yours. If the member for Maryborough has them, I invite him to table them. There aren’tany. Let me make it clear: we are determined to do everything we can to provide water toQueenslanders wherever they live. I would have thought that we would have had some support from themember for Maryborough instead of him trying to undermine a dam that will actually provide bettersecurity for his community and floodproof his community.

Let me talk about these issues at some length. In terms of the Traveston Dam, this is part of thegovernment’s approach to water security and it is made up of many strategies. The Queensland WaterPlan 2005-10 released last year details seven strategies, including planning for future water needs andsmarter use of existing supplies. Rainwater tanks are also an important water conservation measure.

Opposition members interjected.Mr BEATTIE: That is typical of the Liberal Party. They think it is funny. The Liberal Party does not

care. Let me make it clear—Mr Quinn: You’re talking about floodproofing in a drought! Mr BEATTIE: It is easy to see the village idiot is here today. Opposition members interjected.Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Member for Robina, order. It is not your question. I cannot stop

people from laughing if they get that feeling, but, honestly, try to limit it, all right? Mr BEATTIE: It is clearly a tactic where they laugh simply to disrupt the parliament. That is what it

is. Opposition members interjected.Mr BEATTIE: I rest my case. Let me say this clearly: I am happy to go to the people and say that

we will build the two dams and those opposite will oppose it. That is the challenge. Come on! I will go outand quite happily say to the people of Queensland that we are going to build two dams, one of them atTraveston—one of them will be built on the Logan River and the other on the Mary—and those oppositego out and oppose it. Let the record show that the Liberal Party and the National Party are opposed toboth of these dams.

Opposition members interjected.Mr BEATTIE: You see, maybe not. The members opposite are, and we will go out and campaign

for it. Mr Quinn: Good try, good try.Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Member for Robina, 253. Would honourable members—Mr Beattie interjected. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: And now the Premier. Mr BEATTIE: When are we actually going to have some sensible behaviour in this House? It is

disgraceful.Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Premier, I think what you are saying could be a reflection on the chair.


Rental Housing MarketMs STONE: My question without notice is to the minister for housing. I refer to the article in the

Sunday Mail on the weekend which highlights skyrocketing private rental costs in Queensland—a veryserious issue for most of our constituents, I would think. I ask the minister for housing whether heexpects any support for his homelink proposal in tonight’s federal budget?

Mr SCHWARTEN: I thank the honourable member for her ongoing interest in housing. She is oneof those tireless workers trying to help people struggling with the private rental prices that we have inQueensland at this stage.

I am delighted that she is the person who has brought up the position of Homelink in thisparliament. Homelink is a very sincere attempt by this government to try to engage the federalgovernment in the issue of provision of private housing. I am delighted that the federal Liberal Party,which is obviously at odds with the coalition in Queensland, has actually shown some interest in it andhas written to me and wants to know more about it. I am delighted that that is the case.

I am hopeful that tonight in the budget, for the first time in 10 years of Howard government, we willhear something about housing. I am hopeful that Mal Brough will have been able to get his way. Ofcourse, there is no support coming for anything like that from those opposite here. In fact, I congratulatethe local government minister for seeing through the political stunt here this morning and the politicalstunt by the council that has gone down this path of saying that it used planning laws on the Rode Roadsite. It did not use planning laws at all. It was not about planning; it was about politics. If it was aboutplanning, it would not have allowed the Commonwealth to go down the road and smash every tree downon exactly the same site in what was a koala corridor and in this site stymie us.

We know that Councillor Norm Wyndham went around and told anyone who would listen that theywould stop this at all costs. The member for Stafford is well aware of this and I thank him for his doggedsupport for the people out there who need nursing homes and who need that money spent in theStafford area as part of our Brisbane suburb improvement scheme—something which is opposed by themember for Chatsworth and his puppet Mr Schrinner, who is resorting to telling untruths, telling peoplethat we are going to put a thousand units of accommodation there. Unlike him, the member for Staffordtells the truth to his constituents and we have not had any problem.

We know where the Liberals stand in Brisbane in relation to homelessness, we know where theystand in terms of trying to help people get affordable housing: they stand nowhere. They have no policyon the matter. Every time we put up a policy they oppose it. They try to get us to give away land to theBrisbane City Council and take it away from homeless people in this state. When the minister has thecourage and the decency to see through it and to call it in in the interests of the state, they oppose that,too. The reality is that I am delighted that the federal government, for the first time ever, is looking at ourinitiative.

Water SupplyMr COPELAND: My question is to the Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Water. I refer to

the proposal to add 25 per cent recycled sewage to Toowoomba’s drinking water supplies. Does theminister agree with New South Wales Premier Morris Iemma, who said yesterday that he would not beputting recycled water into drinking supplies in New South Wales because ‘there are still unresolvedissues with the health authorities’, or does the minister support adding recycled sewage to the drinkingwater supplies of south-east Queensland, including Brisbane?

Mr PALASZCZUK: My understanding is that the New South Wales Premier is not looking atexisting premises; he is looking at new houses about to be built so the question is based on a falsepremise.

Mr COPELAND: I rise to a point or order. I table a transcript of yesterday’s—Mr ACTING SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

Apprentices and TraineesMr WILSON: My question is to the Minister for Employment, Training and Industrial Relations.

Queensland continues to record record numbers of apprentices and trainees in these times of acuteskills shortages. Can the minister tell the House about the new independent national survey that hasbeen released saying that quantity does not come at the expense of quality with Queensland’s training?

Mr BARTON: I thank the member for the question. He takes a very keen interest in trainingissues. It is certainly pleasing to be able to report that a recent national survey revealed a strong level ofsatisfaction among Queensland employers with the training being provided to apprentices and trainees.The latest survey of employers by the independent National Centre for Vocational Education Researchshows that 81 per cent of Queensland employers are satisfied with their training. This compares with75 per cent nationally. Not only are we getting more Queenslanders into training, but also this latestsurvey confirms employers have generally been happy with the quality of that training.

1454 Papers 09 May 2006

I am sure honourable members will agree that it is essential that quality training be provided, fromthe point of view of both employers and, of course, apprentices and trainees. We are confident that therecently released $1 billion-plus Queensland Skills Plan will further improve our training system to thebenefit of employers and apprentices alike.

Importantly, the survey also found that the vast majority of Queensland employers—some 85 percent—rated training as either important or very important for their overall business strategy. That beliefin the value of training for both new and existing employees is being reflected in record numbers ofQueenslanders in training, in apprenticeships and traineeships.

The most recent NCVER statistics show that apprentice and trainee numbers continue to growstrongly in Queensland. As at September 2005 they are at an all-time high—77,200 apprentices andtrainees in training, an increase of 3,800 or 4.9 per cent over the previous year. This represents a 60 percent increase in the numbers in training in Queensland since the Beattie government came to office. Italso underlines our success in helping to create a strong training culture in Queensland—a culturewhich will be reinforced by the Queensland Skills Plan. Queensland now has recorded 23 successivequarters of year-on-year growth in numbers in training. We have achieved this while nationally year onyear the numbers in training have fallen for six successive quarters.

Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! The time for questions has now expired.

PETITIONSThe following honourable members have lodged paper petitions for presentation—

Eastern BuswayMs Bligh from 76 petitioners requesting the House to move the proposed Eastern Busway and associated portals, tunnels,roadways and entrances at least 300 metres from Buranda State School.

Yeppoon, Seawater Swimming EnclosureMr Hoolihan from 3,066 petitioners requesting the House to consider and approve a seawater swimming enclosure being erectedat Yeppoon on the southern end of the Main Beach with lighting for night swimmers.The following honourable members have sponsored e-petitions which are now closed and presented—

Asbestos in SchoolsMr Langbroek from 144 petitioners requesting the House to replace asbestos roofs at the Coolum, Eumundi, Tewantin, Cooroyand Pomona State Schools, as well as the Noosa District State High School, as a matter of priority.

Surfers Paradise, Police ResourcesMr Langbroek from 33 petitioners requesting the House to increase police numbers at Surfers Paradise Police Station as ameasure directed at restoring officer safety and morale, ensuring there are enough police to respond to emergencies, combatinglocal crime and ensuring the concentrated local and tourist population feels safe.

PAPERSPAPERS TABLED DURING THE RECESSThe Clerk informed the House that the following papers, received during the recess, were tabled on the dates indicated—24 April 2006—• Manual for the National Tax Equivalent Regime—January 2006 (Version 5)• Report to the Legislative Assembly on an overseas visit to New Zealand by the Minister for Police and Corrective Services

(Ms Spence) from 5 to 8 April 200626 April 2006—• Response from the Minister for Child Safety (Mr Reynolds) to an E-petition sponsored by Mr English from 333 petitioners

regarding the Adoption of Children Act 196427 April 2006—• Overseas Travel Report by the Minister for Health (Mr Robertson) on a trip to New Zealand 6-8 April 200628 April 2006—• Twenty-sixth Report of the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal dated 28 November 2005, pursuant to the Judges (Salaries

and Allowances Act) 1967• Salaries and Allowances Tribunal Determination (No. 1) 20064 May 2006—• Response from the Minister for Transport and Main Roads (Mr Lucas) to a paper petition presented by Mr Wellington from

94 petitioners regarding noise from heavy vehicles on the Bruce Highway5 May 2006—• Auditor-General Report No. 1 for 2006—Results of Local Government Audits for 2004-05

09 May 2006 Papers 1455

• Report to be tabled in the Legislative Assembly about Minister’s decision on a call in of a development application underthe Integrated Planning Act 1997—Development Application by Attunga Heights Pty Ltd—27 Attunga Heights Road,Noosa Heads—Called in by the Minister for Local Government and Planning, the Honourable Desley Boyle MP, on 1December 2005 and decided by the Minister for Local Government and Planning, the Honourable Desley Boyle MP, on 6March 2006

• Report to Legislative Assembly on the Ministerial Call-In by the Minister for Local Government and Planning, theHonourable Desley Boyle MP, of two development applications at Buchan Point, Cairns

• Board of Teacher Registration—Annual Report 2005• Brisbane Girls Grammar School—Annual Report 2005• Ipswich Girls’ Grammar School and Ipswich Junior Grammar School—Annual Report 2005• Ipswich Grammar School—Annual Report 2005• Rockhampton Girls’ Grammar School—Annual Report 2005• Toowoomba Grammar School—Annual Report 2005• Central Queensland University—Annual Report 2005• Griffith University—Annual Report 2005• James Cook University—Annual Report 2005• Queensland University of Technology—Annual Report 2005, Volumes One and Two • University of Southern Queensland—Annual Report 2005• University of the Sunshine Coast—Annual Report 2005• University of Queensland—Annual Report 2005 and Appendices• Queensland Theatre Company—Annual Report 20058 May 2006—• Board of Trustees of the Rockhampton Grammar School—Annual Report 2005• Board of Trustees of the Townsville Grammar School—Annual Report 2005STATUTORY INSTRUMENTSThe following statutory instruments were tabled by the Clerk—Liquor Act 1992—• Liquor Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2006, No. 66 and Explanatory Notes and Regulatory Impact Statement for No. 66Liquor Act 1992—• Liquor Amendment Regulation (No. 3) 2006, No. 67 and Explanatory Notes for No. 67 Liquor Amendment Act 2005—• Liquor Amendment (Postponement) Regulation 2006, No. 68Aboriginal Communities (Justice and Land Matters) Act 1984—• Aboriginal Communities (Justice and Land Matters) Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2006, No. 69Drug Legislation Amendment Act 2006—• Proclamation commencing certain provisions, No. 70Drugs Misuse Act 1986—• Drugs Misuse Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2006, No. 71Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991—• Supreme Court (Legal Practitioner Admission) Amendment Rule (No. 1) 2006, No. 72Rural and Regional Adjustment Act 1994—• Rural and Regional Adjustment Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2006, No. 73Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Act 1994—• Transport Operations (Passenger Transport) Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2006, No. 74Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995—• Workplace Health and Safety (Codes of Practice) Amendment Notice (No. 1) 2006, No. 75Public Service Act 1996—• Public Service Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2006, No. 76Forestry Plantations Queensland Act 2006—• Proclamation commencing remaining provisions, No. 77Forestry Plantations Queensland Act 2006—• Forestry Plantations Queensland Regulation 2006, No. 78Liquor Act 1992—• Liquor Amendment Regulation (No. 4) 2006, No. 79 and Explanatory Notes for No. 79Forestry Act 1959—• Forestry (State Forests) Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2006, No. 80Environmental Protection Act 1994—• Environmental Protection Policies Amendment Policy (No. 1) 2006, No. 81

1456 Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee 09 May 2006

Land Court Act 2000—• Land Court Amendment Rule (No. 1) 2006, No. 82State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971—• State Development and Public Works Organisation Amendment Regulation (No. 2) 2006, No. 83Water Act 2000—• Water Amendment Regulation (No. 3) 2006 and Explanatory Notes for No. 84REPORT TABLED BY THE CLERKThe following report was tabled by the Clerk—Report pursuant to Standing Order 158 (Clerical errors or formal changes to any bill) detailing amendments to certain Bills, madeby the Clerk, prior to assent by Her Excellency the Governor, viz—

Recreation Areas Management Bill 2005Amendments made to Bill

Short title and consequential references to short title, amended—omit—‘2005’insert—‘2006’.

SCRUTINY OF LEGISLATION COMMITTEE

ReportHon. KW HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) (11.41 am): I lay upon the table of the House the Scrutiny

of Legislation Committee’s Alert Digest No. 5 of 2006.

MEMBERS’ ETHICS AND PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGES COMMITTEE

ReportMrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (11.41 am): I table report No. 75 of the Members’

Ethics and Parliamentary Privileges Committee titled Matters of privilege referred by the Speaker on 28February and 29 March 2006 relating to alleged irregularities and failure to comply with conditions ofuse of petitions. I commend the report to the House.

I also table notice No. 1 of 2006 titled Reflections on the chair. The information notice reflects the30 March 2006 amendment to standing order 266—examples of contempt.

PARLIAMENTARY CRIME AND MISCONDUCT COMMITTEE

ReportMr WILSON (Ferny Grove—ALP) (11.42 am): I lay upon the table of the House a report of the

Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee on complaints about the Crime and MisconductCommission made by the member for Sandgate, the Hon. Gordon Nuttall. Mr Nuttall’s complaintsrelated to the CMC’s investigation and report into allegations that he deliberately misled an estimatescommittee.

On 16 February Mr Nuttall made a statement in the chamber in which he raised concernsregarding the CMC’s investigation and report. He tabled an opinion by Mr Morris QC which was criticalof the CMC. He wrote to the committee that same day regarding his concerns. On 9 March theparliamentary committee announced that it had referred Mr Nuttall’s complaints to the ParliamentaryCrime and Misconduct Commissioner, Mr Alan MacSporran. The role of the PCMC is to monitor andreview the performance of the CMC and to take action authorised under the act on any matters ofconcern. The parliamentary commissioner assists the committee in this role. However, unlike a court oflaw, neither the PCMC nor the parliamentary commissioner acts as an appeal avenue against decisionsmade by the CMC, and they cannot substitute their own decision for one made by the CMC.Accordingly, the PCMC asked Mr MacSporran to examine the report of the commission and advise thecommittee whether, in respect of Mr Nuttall’s concerns, the actions of the CMC were appropriate in all ofthe circumstances.

One of the complaints by Mr Nuttall was that the CMC was legally obliged to give reasons for itsdecision to adopt certain legal advices it had received in preference to other advices that were before itbut had failed to do so. In his opinion, Mr Morris argued that the rules of natural justice imposed a legal

09 May 2006 Matters of Public Interest 1457

obligation upon the CMC to give such reasons. In his report to the committee, Mr MacSporran statesthat in his view the actions of the CMC were appropriate in all of the circumstances. In particular,Mr MacSporran concluded that the proposition that the laws of natural justice require the CMC to givereasons in its report as asserted by Mr Morris is not supported by any judicial authority, nor is there anyother legal obligation which required the giving of reasons. That notwithstanding, the committee is of theopinion that, from the viewpoint of good public policy and practice, CMC reports dealing with complexlegal issues where there are conflicting legal opinions should fully set out the CMC’s reasons forpreferring the legal opinions that it adopts.

I also remind members that the committee has called for submissions to its current three-yearreview of the CMC. The committee welcomes submissions from members and the public at large. Icommend the report to the House.

MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST

Montville, Development ApplicationMr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (11.44 am): We have

seen some extraordinary ducking, diving and weaving from government ministers in parliament thismorning, firstly from the minister for local government and planning on this government’s corrupt actionsin calling in the Montville Links approval. This government is becoming known more and more forusurping proper and due process. Not only has it done it in the case of Montville Links, it has done it inmore recent times in the case of the development of an aged-care facility at Stafford Heights. They arejust two examples of a number which have been done by this government in recent times.

Can members imagine in times past the reaction of the Labor Party as it sat on this side of theHouse, or the media or others in the community, if governments had used the ministerial call-in powerwith the propensity that this government has? There would have been absolute outrage. There wouldhave been an absolute outcry. What we have seen from this government is an absolute corruption ofdue and appropriate process, particularly in the case of Montville Links and recently with regard toStafford Heights.

Let us look at Montville Links for one moment. This was an application which was made prior tothe adoption of the South East Queensland Regional Plan. The developers in question jumped throughevery environmental hoop and guideline which was put in front of them and which they were asked tocatapult over by both the Maroochy Shire Council and the state Environmental Protection Agency. Letme say that again: the developers in the Montville Links development jumped through every hoop andfulfilled every requirement that was put in front of them by the Maroochy Shire Council and the stateEnvironmental Protection Agency. How can investors and developers have any confidence in thegovernment if they meet the requirements of government agencies, state and local, and then theirapplications are denied? Hundreds of thousands, and in many cases millions of dollars, are outlaid bydevelopers to do that.

It is about time that this government stops making decisions for corrupt political reasons andstarts to appreciate and respect due process. Call-in powers are there for extraordinary purposes. Theyare not there to be used and abused every other day of the week as we have seen by this government.This morning in this place the minister for environment and local government stood up here in answer toa direct question and said that it had nothing to do with her; the Premier called it in. She was runningaway from this at a million miles an hour.

Mr Caltabiano interjected. Mr SPRINGBORG: As the member for Chatsworth says, her own department, the Environmental

Protection Agency, said that it was a good development; that it met all of the environmentalrequirements as laid down by the state government. In actual fact, the minister ticked it off. Herdepartment said that it was fine, but for some extraordinary, unknown and corrupt political reason thePremier called it in to assuage somebody out there. Was that for somebody who was going to give himmoney, or was there going to be some form of political advantage? This is the sort of decision makingthat we get from an arrogant government—from a government that has been in power with this sort ofmajority for far too long.

I reiterate today that when the coalition is elected to government in Queensland we will berevoking the government’s actions in this case. We will be revoking its opposition to the Montville Linksproject. That project should be able to be properly considered based on town planning guidelines andenvironmental guidelines. On those two criteria, it met them and met them absolutely perfectly. TheSouth East Queensland Regional Plan argument is a nonsense, and everyone knows that it is anonsense. Every member who has sat in here and passed legislation, whether it be in one term or ineight terms, knows that when somebody is putting in an application or when somebody is tried in a courtof law they are dealt with in accordance with the rules and the laws of the time.

1458 Matters of Public Interest 09 May 2006

That is an established principle. They are not considered based on what the law may besubsequent to that particular event. That is an established principle in this place. This government ispicking and choosing the application of that particular principle. This was a corrupt decision by a corruptgovernment that was wanting to do a favour for some of its political mates or, maybe even worse, wasseeking some sort of financial gain. It is something which we will overturn.

On the issue of water, we have seen this Premier and the government again thrashing around ondecent water resource policy in Queensland. Let us not forget that only last year this government wascondemning the coalition in Queensland which was wanting to build dams. The minister for naturalresources at the time, Stephen Robertson, was running around saying, ‘It is dinosaurian. You do notbuild dams anymore. That is 1950s thinking.’ I do not know what the new approach for getting water is. Ithought dams were always an integral part of any water resource, planning and delivery policy in thisstate along with other options which, frankly, we have always supported.

If this government had not sat on its backside with absolute sloth-like inaction over the past eightyears, we would have had the recycled water pipeline through to the Lockyer Valley by now and possiblyeven beyond. That is the sloth-like inaction that we have seen from this government. We cannotrecreate history. When decent, proper water resource planning and storage propositions have been putforward by the Queensland coalition, this government has pooh-poohed them, criticised them, knockedthem and done nothing but whinge, whine, bellyache and carry on. It has no alternatives to date. It hasbeen 11th hour stuff. Even if it can get a dam up, it is going to be three years too late for the people whowill have run out of water in south-east Queensland.

Look at the absolute lunatic comments from the minister for local government, planning andenvironment. She said, ‘These things are boy’s toys. These things are blokes’ things. You cannot havebig dams because they are just blokes’ things. We don’t want them.’ That has been the thinking that hascaused all these problems.

The Premier has made a foray into this in recent times. Faced with political oblivion he said,‘Mr DG or Mr Coordinator for state development’—or whatever he is—‘we need to be seen to be doingsomething. Can you dream us up a grand dam proposal? We do not ever want to deliver it; that is notthe criteria. We absolutely do not want to deliver it. We want to put it in a place where we know it cannever be built.’ What happened? The Coordinator-General has come back and basically said, ‘Lo andbehold, Premier, we have one just for you. Here is the dam site on the Mary River at Traveston,’ whichwas ruled out in 1972 for a range of reasons including inundation of prime agricultural land, engineering,geotechnical cost and all that sort of the thing. He went on, ‘But the better thing is that it was ruled out bythe Goss government of which you were a part in 1994 for exactly the same reason.’ That is what theydid. The Premier said, ‘Oh gee, that suits. That is exactly what I want because I am all about deceptionand spin. I want the people to believe that I am going to build dams.’ They would have said, ‘Premier,but you already have the land for four dams in south-east Queensland. You have acquired 37 per centof land at Wyaralong in the Boonah shire. Why would you acquire that if you were not going to build it?You have acquired 96 per cent of land at Glendower in the Beaudesert shire. Why would you do that ifyou are not going to build it? You have land acquired at Amamoor Creek for a dam. There is landacquired for the stage 3 raising of Borumba Dam in the Mary Valley.’ The Premier said, ‘That is not ourobjective. We do not want to build dams. We want to be seen to be building dams to whip ourselves intoa frenzy.’ That is what he has done. Then he jumped into a helicopter with Mick Vernardos, the mayor,and they flew around there. They pointed out the Mary Valley rattler. When he asked, ‘What’s that?’ thereply was, ‘It is a train.’ ‘Oh gee, we will have to shift the line because it would not make a very goodsubmarine.’ Then somebody said, ‘The Bruce Highway is going to be flooded.’ ‘What’s that? Oh gee, wedid not think about that.’ Warren Truss’s office, the federal transport minister, rang up the statedepartment of transport and main roads and said, ‘What about this dam that is going to flood the BruceHighway?’ He asked, ‘What dam?’ They have to talk about which dam. They said, ‘We have two bypassproposals right across the three-kilometre section.’ ‘Oh, we did not know about that,’ they said. So thereare the powerlines and suchlike. Now we are going to have New Orleans on the Mary.

We are going to have a dyke built around Kandanga and Imbil. Talk about absolutely stupid,absurd policy on the run! If the government is going to build a dam, then it should do the geotechnicalwork; it should do the work in assessing the cost of it; it should do the EIS; it should do all those sorts ofthings. Interestingly enough, there are dam sites that the government already owns where it has donethat work. It could have the water in there in three or four years time, not at some time in the never-neverwhich it will never deliver and which it hopes it never has to deliver.

It is about time that we saw an end to this charlatan, carpetbagging, smoke and mirrors, crisispolitics in government in Queensland from this Premier. We want serious dam proposals. The coalitionwill build dams. We will build them where we know we can actually deliver them—in sites that havealready been acquired. That is what will guarantee the water supply for the people of south-eastQueensland.


National Skills ChampionshipsMs STRUTHERS (Algester—ALP) (11.54 am): The Beattie government is focused on delivering

skills, skills and more skills for Queenslanders. Last week I congratulated and farewelled theQueensland WorldSkills Team who were heading off to Melbourne for the national skills championships.I am very proud to report to members today that over 18 medals were won by Queenslanders at theWorldSkills titles. These young people came from around Queensland. They are great young peopledoing great work in the trades areas.

One of the eager team members was Ashley Chambers, a young metalworker from my localarea. Ashley is a very proud employee of Stoddart in Sunnybank Hills. Congratulations also goes to theStoddart company. It has been a great local manufacturing company in my local area. Bill Stoddart is thechairman of WorldSkills Queensland.

It was a great championship tournament. WorldSkills celebrates training excellence and promotesthe value of trades and vocational education and training generally. The Queensland team was made upof 55 adult apprentices and 10 school based apprentices. They did Queensland proud. ‘Go themaroons!’, I said when I bade them farewell, and they sure did.

Across this great state the Beattie government’s employment and training policies and programsare literally putting tools into the hands of Queenslanders. The Beattie government is helping people togain job security and realising their career dreams whilst also kicking productivity to great heights in thisstate. Now Queenslanders stand to benefit even more from the Queensland Skills Plan, our billion-dollarblueprint, which will meet the skills needs of Queensland industries by improving training for newentrants and upskilling older workers. A great part of our skills plan is the fact that older people will haveopportunities to get recognition of their prior learning and be retrained in new skills and opportunities.

As the Minister for Employment, Training, Industrial Relations and Sport, Tom Barton, said earlier,we have seen a 60 per cent increase in training places since the Beattie government came to office.That is a whole lot of new apprenticeship and training opportunities for young people across this state.We know that we are facing a severe skills shortage around Australia. That is partly because youngpeople have not been encouraged into the trades. One of the great things in the Queensland Skills Planis the Try-A-Trade opportunity. I urge all members in this House to promote that program in their localareas. Acacia Ridge in my area will have a great opportunity with the skills centre for excellence. We willbe encouraging people to try a trade and get that message out, particularly through the schools in mylocal area.

While I am talking about my local schools, let me congratulate Forest Lake State High School. Icongratulate Heather Varcin, the principal, and her team at Forest Lake State High School. Last week itbecame a Beacon Foundation school. The Beacon Foundation is a national not-for-profit organisationthat promotes skills development amongst young people. Beacon Foundation will actively help ForestLake to build stronger industry links, but Forest Lake already has done a great job. In 2005 the schoolawarded 67 vocational education and training qualifications to students. That is a great number of youngpeople who are getting opportunities not only to participate in school but to also start their work by takingadvantage of a trade opportunity. The school has developed excellent working relationships and Icommend the local businesspeople who were there at the breakfast last week. There were local guysfrom welding and other companies who had come to the school to lend a hand. That is what it is allabout. That is what our education and training reform agenda is all about. It is getting new pathways foryoung people, getting schools thinking more broadly, providing opportunities for young people who areoutside the box of traditional education. Young people in my area are taking up these opportunities. Icommend Forest Lake State High School for their efforts.

Cyclone MonicaMr O’BRIEN (Cook—ALP) (11.59 am): State government agencies have been working around

the clock in the wake of widespread and significant damage caused by Tropical Cyclone Monica, whichcrossed Cape York Peninsula on 19 April 2006 just south of Lockhart River. Emergency servicesminister Pat Purcell and I went to Lockhart River the following day to survey the situation firsthand. Thedamage included minor damage to about 20 per cent of houses and significant damage to accessroads. People were generally in good spirits and condition. Since then, heavy rain has continued to fallover Cape York Peninsula causing widespread flooding to properties and all but destroying thePeninsula Development Road between Musgrave Station and Coen. The road is the lifeblood of CapeYork and efforts are underway to restore it to a trafficable condition, especially for freight, fuel andemergency services. I will talk more about the road in a moment.

Many communities and properties on Cape York remain isolated due to the recent prolonged rainand severely flood damaged roads. A number of people have had to be evacuated from their propertiesand are only now starting to return to those properties. The Minister for Emergency Services activatedthe Commonwealth-state natural disaster relief arrangements for the Cyclone Monica disaster event,Tropical Cyclone Larry and Cyclone Monica and flooding, March-April 2006. As such, there is now


formal acknowledgement that the damage and flooding from Cyclone Larry and Cyclone Monica haveoverlapped. As a result, the original activation for Cyclone Larry has been extended to also cover thecape.

I pay tribute to those in the Department of Emergency Services for their work post CycloneMonica. Wayne Coutts and Wayne Hepple from the district office and their team of volunteers on theground have been working constantly for months now, first for Cyclone Larry and then for CycloneMonica. No-one in this state deserves a holiday more than those two gentlemen.

I will now provide the House with some specific agency responses. The SES chopper crewsmade three fuel drops on Sunday, 7 May delivering over 6,000 litres to Coen—an amount constitutingapproximately six days worth of fuel for the electricity generator. A total of two tonnes of food was alsodelivered on Friday, 5 May and Saturday, 6 May. Monday, 8 May also saw the SES heli-jack chopper flyin diesel for Ergon generators in Coen, in addition to fuel to service the rescue helicopter. An additional8,000 litres of fuel drops were also delivered. By Thursday, 11 May it is intended that an additional50,000 litres of fuel, 30 days worth, will be delivered, including aviation fuel for the Coen airport, toensure that any emergency situations are covered.

Access to properties has been limited due to bad weather, but SES crews have been able torespond to all evacuation requests. A team comprising representatives from the Department ofCommunities, Centrelink, DPI Fisheries, the Counter Disaster and Rescue Services and StateDevelopment will visit outstations, cattle properties and roadhouses in Coen today and tomorrow toassess current and ongoing needs.

The Department of Main Roads reports that the road between Coen and Musgrave has sustainedthe heaviest and greatest amount of structural road damage from floodwater. The section of road northof Hann River is still extremely boggy and is unlikely to support any heavy vehicles for at least anotherweek or two. Main Roads equipment was sent in last week in an attempt to begin repairs but wasrecalled after the ground proved too waterlogged to permit access and work.

Floodwaters were subsiding and some vehicles have successfully travelled from Coen to Cairns,including my own, sourcing extra supplies for the area. However, road conditions are extremely poorand wet and likely to deteriorate with continued use. The Department of Main Roads predicts that theroad to Coen should be up and running for normal traffic by the end of May depending upon the weatherclearing sufficiently to enable the ground to allow weight-bearing repair equipment. Rainfall haslessened over the last few weeks and that is a positive sign. All national parks on Cape York Peninsularemain closed and are likely to remain so until mid-June whereupon selective opening will commenceaccording to road conditions.

An assessment team from the Department of Communities visited the region last week to talk toaffected individuals and property owners regarding access to counselling, information and referralservices. They are providing ongoing liaison coordination between the service response agencies viathe disaster recovery committee.

Time expired.

Westgate Project

Dr FLEGG (Moggill—Lib) (12.04 pm): The state government has proposed development of theWestgate project for an area of state owned land around Wacol and the correctional facilities and policeacademy. This proposal had very limited public consultation between Remembrance Day 2005 and 22December 2005, with the vast majority of the affected community being unaware that publicsubmissions had even been invited. There were four proposals put forward for discussion. All four werevery similar. All four contained bridges across the Brisbane River to Bellbowrie and all four proposalsindicated significant high-density residential development with a capacity for possibly up to 10,000people.

This brings into question the whole problem that confronts the residents of the western suburbs ofBrisbane, that of hopelessly inadequate infrastructure, particularly transport infrastructure. Everymorning the Western Freeway is bumper to bumper with cars that travel at a snail’s pace for kilometresfrom the Toowong roundabout virtually back to Jindalee. This has had a severe impact on the amenityand lifestyle of people who reside in the Centenary suburbs, in my electorate of Moggill and theIndooroopilly and Bardon areas as traffic congestion banks up in all directions from the WesternFreeway and the Toowong roundabout.

Transport department figures reveal that Western Freeway traffic has skyrocketed in recent yearsfrom 62,262 car movements per day in 1999 to 67,708 in 2003 and up to 70,725 per day in 2005.Alarmingly for local residents, traffic volumes on the Western Freeway only increase by about 5.7 percent between the Brisbane River and the Toowong roundabout. This is despite the 33,000 cars a daythat approach the Western Freeway on Moggill Road at Chapel Hill.


Clearly, many thousands of cars a day use local streets like Roun Road, Birdwood Terrace,Taringa Parade, Kenmore Road, Jerrang Street, Seventeen Mile Rocks Road and the Walter TaylorBridge just to avoid the Western Freeway. Residents of the western suburbs are deeply concerned thatwe continue to see development such as Westgate and development in the Moggill-Bellbowrie areawithout any regard for the fact that existing infrastructure, particularly transport infrastructure, is totallyinadequate to support the needs of these new residents, let alone the ongoing population growth.

Local residents have to leave home earlier and earlier just to get to work, with adverse impacts onfamily life and even the time they get to exercise. Many have to have their breakfast at work simplybecause of the hour they have to leave home. We have no local hospital and many older or infirmresidents have to fight the traffic to get to medical or hospital care.

I can say today that the Queensland coalition will give an undertaking to the people of the westernsuburbs, and in particular the Centenary suburbs, that we will not sell the property in the Westgatedevelopment for residential development until such time as adequate infrastructure is provided toservice the existing population, let alone the projected increase in population. To allow a development toproceed which may add up to 10,000 residents in the Centenary area and then expect that number ofvehicles to be added to the already hopeless situation on local roads and the Western Freeway is noton.

Local roads in the Indooroopilly area, Bardon and the Centenary suburbs are choked as traffictries to avoid the chaos of the Western Freeway. It is about time there was a commitment from the stategovernment that, instead of simply ticking off on at times huge developments without any regard for theimpact on local infrastructure, it would ensure infrastructure is adequate to service the needs of thedevelopment that it is approving. For years now the needs of western suburbs motorists have beenignored by the state government.

The Western Freeway, the Toowong roundabout and Moggill Road have been rapidly building intraffic volumes over many years. The state government’s South East Queensland Infrastructure Planoffers no hope of relief for many years to come. The coalition believes it is about time the stategovernment accepted its responsibility. It has had a huge revenue bonanza from the largedevelopments that take place, particularly in the south-east corner of Queensland, but this bonanza ofrevenue comes at a cost. The cost is that the state government must provide the necessaryinfrastructure support. That is why the Queensland coalition has committed itself to address theinfrastructure needs associated with development and not simply sit back, tick off on development andallow things to become worse.

Time expired.

Beef Australia 2006Mr HOOLIHAN (Keppel—ALP) (12.09 pm): It is well known that in 2005 this House sat in

Rockhampton. That was a major coup for central Queensland. The flow-on effects of that sitting couldonly be eclipsed by an event which moved Rockhampton, the Capricorn Coast and the Fitzroy region tothe world stage. I have the pleasure to tell members that Beef Australia 2006, which ran from 1 May to 7May in Rockhampton and which has just concluded, has done just that. The cattle industry andsuppliers of necessary ancillary products to the industry, such as horse equipment, veterinary products,finance and insurance, the major schools, which are the education facilities for so many people who livein comparative isolation to provide the beef and other products which flow from our cattle industry, andthe sponsors, such as the Commonwealth government, the Queensland government, the ANZ Bank,the Rockhampton City Council and smaller sponsors and supporters can hold their heads up proudly forhaving faith in this major event.

As a demonstration of commitment to this event, Rydge’s Capricorn International Resort built atwo-storey marquee to house an international lounge and a fully functioning restaurant for the event.One of the pavilions was a full marquee with air conditioning. The cost must have been enormous butsuch was the faith of the community organisations in Beef Australia 2006.

At one stage during the past three years there was a suggestion that this event should move toToowoomba. I say to anyone who would suggest that today that they must have had rocks in their headto consider moving Beef Australia 2006 from the undoubted beef capital of Australia, Rockhampton.

The electorate of Rockhampton, which is fearlessly represented by the Hon. Robert Schwarten,my electorate of Keppel and the electorate of Fitzroy, which is represented by Jim Pearce, cover someof our major beef producing areas. Producers from around the world came to Beef Australia 2006 to seethe cream of our industry. They provided a valuable economic boost to the area. Together with thoseother two members, I was pleased to be an ambassador for Beef Australia 2006.

An estimated 600 overseas beef producers stayed in the region and enjoyed the delights of theCapricornia area. We want to build on that for Beef Australia 2009. I pay particular compliments and givecongratulations to the board of management of Beef Australia Ltd, especially their livewire chairman,


Geoff Murphy. By the time the closing ceremony was held, Geoff must have been the most tired man inQueensland, because he never stopped for the whole week. That was only for that week. He had beenon the go for three years prior to that.

It has been a great pleasure to work with Geoff to promote Beef Australia 2006 and I look forwardto any further promotion of Beef Australia. He will have my full support. Geoff has been ably supportedby his management team of vice-chairs Chris Todd and Blair Angus, secretary Ian Weigh, treasurerJohn Croaker and Alice Greenup, Angus Adnam, Geoff Maynard, Ray Slasberg and Brett Prosser.

Despite the success of the week, it was tinged with sadness. On Sunday, 7 May Ray Slasberglost his fight with cancer. He certainly worked hard to contribute to the success of the event despite hisillness. He also worked to develop Australia’s beef industry. He was a driving force behind the AustralianLivestock Industries Development Corporation, which was established to pursue high value-adding toanimal coproducts and biactives, which are highly sought after by the global pharmaceutical industry. Hewas also part of the Consolidated Meat Group’s senior management team at the time of its closure in2002. Even the union members who lost their jobs spoke highly of his integrity. I also worked with Ray torejuvenate the Yeppoon Turf Club. His hard work and knowledge of his community will be sorely missed.To his wife, Amanda, and his family, I convey my condolences. I know that anyone who worked with orwho knew Ray will also express their sorrow at his passing.

The work of the members of the Beef Australia 2006 committee could not have translated to thesuccess of Beef Australia 2006 without the hard work of the administration staff, Heather Clelland andNoel Landry. Noel was so committed to his work that he was not present at the birth of his newest childduring the week. Heather and Noel would have been pleased with the success of Beef Australia 2006for which they worked so hard. I congratulate them on a job well done.

It was great to see a large number of people who live in comparative isolation to raise ourestimated beef cattle herd of 23 million come together for the benefit of their industry. They came in theirhundreds and their thousands. Also, visitors from overseas came to the event. An instance of supportthat the event received from overseas entities was the holding of the World Braford Conference atRydges Capricorn International Resort during the week.

No-one could get accommodation anywhere in Rockhampton, on the Capricorn Coast or atGracemere as accommodation was booked out for Beef Australia 2006. People were even rentingprivate houses because of the number of people who came for this major event. Because of the hardwork of a number of people, including many behind the scenes, Beef Australia 2006 was an unqualifiedsuccess. I know that most—if not all—of our overseas visitors will return to their own countries with greatmemories of their visit and, hopefully, they will want to return to Rockhampton, the Capricorn Coast andthe Fitzroy region. I say: well done.

Time expired.

Stock InspectorsMr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (12.14 pm): One of the most important tasks of the DPI is

biosecurity, particularly in this era of the threat of foot-and-mouth disease and bird flu, the incursion offire ants and so forth. The front-line troops of biosecurity are stock inspectors. Under the Beattie Laborgovernment and the previous Goss government we have seen a gradual and continual run-down in thenumber of stock inspectors throughout Queensland. Stock inspectors are the troops who are on theground. They know people, they know the roads, they know the movements of stock and they are ableto provide all the important advice that local communities and districts need regarding the transport andmovement of animals and the various regulations that apply with regard to disease control.

Recently, we saw a mock simulation of a disease outbreak involving 80 to 100 police with some ofthose police coming from over the border in New South Wales. It was based upon a report of a foot-and-mouth disease outbreak. In this mock exercise the outbreak was identified at the Toowoomba saleyards.The exercise then moved out to Millmerran. Millmerran is a very important place. There are overone million birds there. One of the biggest intensive poultry industries in Australia is based there. Lo andbehold, the exercise highlighted the disgraceful situation that a stock inspector is not stationed atMillmerran.

This is the problem we are seeing occur right across southern Queensland. Places such asClifton, Pittsworth and Millmerran, which are the centres for the feedlot industry, the intensive poultryindustry and the intensive piggery industry, do not have stock inspectors. The community is much lesssafe in its fight against an outbreak of these exotic diseases because of this lack of stock inspectors.

Not only that, we are seeing an increased number of lifestyle and hobby farms throughoutsouthern Queensland. The people involved in them should be aware of the regulations in terms of whatthey can and cannot do and what is best practice in the raising of their livestock in terms of animalwelfare, chemical application, plant biosecurity or animal biosecurity. At the same time there has been amassive increase in the number of horses throughout southern Queensland. But southern Queensland


has been virtually denuded of stock inspectors. Of course, it is well known that shortages of stockinspectors have occurred elsewhere in the state. Even the tick line has been forced to have third-partyinspectors. Vacancies for stock inspectors have existed for long periods throughout the state.

The way in which the DPI budget has been cut is an absolute disgrace—some $39 million overthe past three years. We have seen cutbacks in staff numbers from 32 stock inspectors in the early1990s down to 20 on the Darling Downs and in the southern Queensland area. We are losing the front-line troops. But this government does not care. DPI and rural Queensland just gets the crumbs off thetable. The DPI is seen as a milking cow by which funds can be taken out of that very importantdepartment in order to prop up programs that have failed because of the government’smismanagement, such as what has happened in Health and the former department of families.

I call on this government to vastly increase the budget for the DPI and also the number of stockinspectors. Certainly, when we get into government at the next election we will bring about the vastimprovement that is needed. I urge people in rural and regional Queensland to phone a friend and telleverybody they know throughout Queensland—the people they know in business, the people they knowin the schools, their friends and their relations that they have throughout Queensland—about the way inwhich the Beattie government has treated people in rural Queensland. People should spread the wordabout the budget cuts and the lack of stock inspectors. They should also spread the word that thecoalition will reverse all of that and bring about an improvement.

Under the Beattie Labor government the DPI has lost its way with regard to service. It hasbecome top heavy with administration and bureaucracy. Someone has just been put in place to controlthe financial management of stock inspectors. That just means more cuts and fewer stock inspectors. Itis about time the front-line service of the DPI—the stock inspecting service—was improved throughextra funding and a boost in staff numbers. It is about time that this government gave some duerecognition to the $11 billion a year primary industries of Queensland and stopped simply cutting andslashing. It is so disgraceful that even when a number of mayors of south-east Queensland had ameeting to find out how this foot-and-mouth exercise went there was not a representative from the DPIthere—only someone from Queensland Health. That is how short of staff they are and that is the waythey treat primary industry in Queensland and this serious problem in southern Queensland.

Federal BudgetMr McNAMARA (Hervey Bay—ALP) (12.19 pm): Later today the federal Treasurer will deliver his

11th budget. For the first time since he inherited a robust, remodelled economy from the Hawke andKeating governments in 1996, the economic fundamentals will be troubling. Treasurer Peter Costellohas smirked his way through the last 10 years on the back of the economic reforms he inherited fromHawke and Keating—a floating dollar, an open economy, a mobile and educated workforce, highproductivity growth of around three per cent per annum, wages growth at five per cent and inflationbetween one and two per cent. It has been Mr Costello’s good luck that those strong fundamentaleconomic indicators have also been augmented by a once in a generation resources boom that hashanded him the $15 to $17 billion surplus that he will distribute tonight.

While for the last 10 years the Australian economy has been able to virtually run itself, tonightAustralia needs real thought and vision in order to avoid Australia sliding into recession. Make nomistake: if Peter Costello pulls the wrong rein tonight, then last Wednesday’s interest rate rise by theReserve Bank will be seen as the starting date of the next recession, which spells disaster to a growthcity like Hervey Bay.

Interest rates are at their highest level in four years. Growth has slowed to a four-year low, andforeign debt and the current account deficit are at all-time highs. After 14 years of solid economicgrowth, the Australian economy is now faced with rising inflation, capacity constraints and slowing GDPgrowth. The Prime Minister and federal Treasurer are fond of pointing out that the current low rate ofunemployment at five per cent is better than that of many European economies and they compare itfavourably with rates of eight to 11 per cent in Europe. What they do not do is point out the differentways in which we measure our unemployment compared with Europe. In Australia you are deemed tobe employed if you work just one hour in the survey week. The Prime Minister recently specificallycompared Australia with Germany, whose unemployment rate is 11.7 per cent, but he did not mentionthat in Germany you are considered unemployed if you work fewer than 15 hours in a survey week andyou would like to have worked more. I wonder how Australia’s unemployment rate would compare if weadded in everyone who would like to have worked more than one hour a week.

Treasurer Costello has in the last week been spruiking that Australia is debt free, blithely ignoringthat the national debt is now $473 billion. This is triple the figure that prompted the federal coalition tosend its infamous debt truck around the country in 1996. But there is no sign of the debt truck beingrolled out by the coalition now. Indeed, if Peter Costello goes ahead with across-the-board tax cuts, itwould appear that he has no clue about the dangers that confront our economy which led the ReserveBank to raise interest rates last week. Income tax cuts will only provide a stimulus for the economy at atime when that is best avoided.


The tight labour market and the upside pressure on wages makes the inflation risk being drivenby rising fuel prices much more intense. If it were not for China and the very low prices we are paying forgoods at the moment, the actual inflation rate would be much higher, as would interest rates. Now,because the Howard government has had the economy on autopilot, it has woken up, with a surplus ofaround $17 billion. Make no mistake: huge budget surpluses for their own sake are not good or fiscallyresponsible policy. If there is no purpose for the raising of the surplus, it would have been better off leftin the pockets of the people from whom it was taken. Taking taxes off people but then giving some of itback to them is neither smart nor efficient.

The federal surplus should be directed with the inflationary effects of the coming liquid fuels crisisfirmly in mind. It should go into infrastructure and transport bottlenecks. It should go into skills training,particularly for our geosciences, engineering and medical workforces. And it should go intosuperannuation as a way of dealing with the collapse in national savings and giving money back to thepeople without being a stimulus for inflation.

Yesterday Chris Richardson from Access Economics said that across-the-board tax cuts will‘increase the risk of another interest rates rise’. If the Howard government tonight chooses to chasevotes with tax cuts and ignores the perils of stimulating more inflationary pressures, it will have only itselfto blame when angry householders find that their $30 tax cut has been wiped out by home loan andcredit card interest rate rises and surging petrol prices. Petrol will hit $2 a litre this year, adding $20 aweek to household fuel bills.

Now is the time for the federal government to commit to national rail and coastal shippingcapacity, to boost regional medical capacity and to make sure that our national savings retirementinitiative is working properly, to increase exploration for oil and gas and the development of alternatives.It is time to put aside the smirk and get to work.

North Queensland, FloodproofingMr CALTABIANO (Chatsworth—Lib) (12.24 pm): I recently had the opportunity to travel to north

and far-north Queensland, travelling from Mackay to Cairns and many points in between. It was a goodopportunity to meet with many community members, businesspeople, Canegrowers associationmembers, civic leaders and my parliamentary colleagues Rosemary Menkens, the member forBurdekin, and Ted Malone, the member for Mirani.

One of the constant themes from residents of north and far-north Queensland was the need toprovide flood-free access to allow them to go about their business, to allow them to have access to theirbusiness and to get on with their lives. The Queensland coalition will develop with these communities aflood-proofing plan for north and far-north Queensland. It is not about shifting the blame, as the currentLabor Party does constantly, to the federal government. The federal government certainly has a majorrole to play in a positive and cooperative environment, but it is not a matter of shifting blame to it. It is amatter of working with the federal government to develop solutions to these problems.

I will soon be meeting with the Minister for Local Government, Territories and Roads, Jim Lloyd, todiscuss options for floodproofing north and far-north Queensland and will stress to him and to thefederal government the need to make available necessary funds in a considered program to enhancethe Bruce Highway. There are many areas requiring attention, like Yellow Gin Creek, south of Home Hill,and, in particular, the Tully region.

What it is about is working with local communities to build solutions to the problems that currentlyexist. There are many stories from locals who have endured blocked road access for many years—notjust as a result of Cyclone Larry but as a result over many years of normal wet season rains. Thisdemonstrates that there must be a system of alternative state roads linking these communities together.There is far too much reliance on Highway No. 1, the Bruce Highway, as a major lifeline for thesecommunities and as a major economic and trade route between these communities. It is time the stategovernment put the effort, energy and funds into developing a comprehensive state road network innorth and far-north Queensland to service these growing communities.

During my time in north Queensland, I took the opportunity to spend an afternoon with the Mayorof the Johnstone Shire Council, Neil Clarke. I am very grateful for the time that Neil gave me to show mearound the Innisfail district and, in particular, to show me some of the projects for the future that thisparticular local council will be undertaking to ensure that their community is rebuilt after the devastatingCyclone Larry event. One such project they are seeking state and federal support for is the constructionof a new Jubilee Bridge, a project that I support.

There are many projects that need to be done in and around the Innisfail township, but all of theserequire significant financial support to this particular local government. The quantum of the problemsthat exist, particularly in the areas of waste, landfill and road structures, is enormous and is a burdenthat is too great for any local government of that size to bear on its own. I am aware of the contributionsthat the state has made to assist this local government, and they are very appreciative—as I am sure allmembers of this House are very appreciative of the support that the government has provided to that


community. I sincerely congratulate the local government, state government and federal government fortheir great effort in that region. A lot has been done and wonderful progress has been made. The LocalGovernment Association, Lions clubs, Rotary clubs and other service clubs in the district have alsoplayed an important part in rebuilding that local community, bringing people together, providing fundingsupport for the rebuilding efforts of scout huts and guide huts—bringing the community together in apositive manner.

This was a cyclone that struck with tremendous force and speed. On the Saturday before thecyclone the weather was fine and the community was aware that a cyclone was more than 1,000kilometres away out to sea. On the Sunday there was a great community event, a yearly event calledFeast of the Senses. As the cyclone drew nearer, all of the shops were closed and there was no accessfor the local community to get water and food. On Monday morning at 6.20 am the cyclone struck.

One of the things that struck me in talking to locals, both in the town of Innisfail and the farmingcommunity in the surrounds of the Innisfail district, was the emotional trauma that many have endured,particularly the canefarmers of the township. The canefarmers had great expectations of a good yearwith sugar prices being up and enough seasonal rain to grow a great crop, particularly after five or sixyears of very bad seasons for them. This cane-farming community comprises predominantly 65- to 80-year-old farmers, and this year was a very, very important year for them. Their emotional state is quitefragile, and rebuilding their confidence and rebuilding that community is a task that should not beunderestimated.

I have a pictorial souvenir of the events of Cyclone Larry, and I will leave it on my desk for theremainder of this sitting week for all members to have a look at. There are many more jobs to becompleted over the coming weeks, months and, in fact, years to ensure that the Innisfail district getsback on its feet and that the community builds on the strength that it has displayed over many years andreturns to the level of prosperity of years gone by. The Queensland coalition is committed to developinga flood-proofing plan for north and far-north Queensland and working with all members of thecommunity at all levels of government to achieve that.

Queensland Fuel Subsidy SchemeMr FRASER (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (12.29 pm): Last month I tabled the report of the Impact of

Petrol Pricing Select Committee. Within the broad terms of reference for that inquiry, we were taskedwith gauging the impacts on Queenslanders who live in outer metropolitan, rural and regional parts ofthe state of higher fuel prices. Queenslanders are big fuel users. We drive more kilometres andpurchase more fuel than is the norm for the rest of Australia.

A key recommendation within the findings of the report was that the federal government abandonplans to cut a subsidy program which compensates people in outer metropolitan, rural and regionalareas for the impact of the GST on fuel prices. While the federal excise and, indeed, the Queenslandsubsidy are applied through a set cents-per-litre equation, it is of course the case that the GST isapplied as a percentage. Simply, the higher the price, the higher the value of the GST. If petrol costs 70cper litre, then the GST is just under 7c; at $1 per litre, the GST is closer to 10c.

The Fuel Sales Grants Scheme was introduced to reflect the fact that fuel in outer metropolitan,rural and regional areas generally costs more than in the metropolitan area. As a result, people who livein these areas and drive to their local service station will pay more GST. This was a key plank in theplatform of tax reform that John Howard took to the Australian people. The price of petrol and the effectof the GST upon it was a central part of the debate at the time, as members will recall. A commitmentwas given—and the Fuel Sales Grants Scheme was a key plank of this commitment—that petrol wouldnot be inflated because of the GST. On 1 July 2006 the GST will exist but the federal government’s fuelsubsidy scheme will not.

I recall the shrillness in recent years of Treasurer Costello’s comments about the absoluteimperative to maintain the Queensland Fuel Subsidy Scheme, an imperative recognised by the inquirythat I chaired. Fast-forward the clock and suddenly, at a time when the cost of petrol is at sustainedhigher levels, the same Peter Costello thinks that now is the time to abolish his own subsidy scheme.

More outrageously, the federal member for Dickson, the new Assistant Treasurer and Minister forRevenue—it seems to be a hell of a job under this government—Peter Dutton, is doing the running onthis. His constituents stand to lose and, indeed, Queenslanders—given the nature of our populationspread—will disproportionately cop the hit of the federal government abandoning this scheme. It defiesbelief that a federal government, which is purportedly sitting on piles of cash, would be so daft as topursue this action.

It is a classic sleight of hand. ‘We will devote the money to roads funding,’ they say. However, asever with the Howard government, what it gives with one hand it takes with the other. Frankly, if oneasked Queensland families today whether they thought the federal government could and should lift itsinvestment in road infrastructure, the answer would be yes. If you asked them whether, at the sametime, it could and should maintain this Fuel Sales Grants Scheme then the answer would also be yes.


One can only imagine the strategy meeting that occurred with the new Assistant Treasurer as hearrived at the Commonwealth government offices in Waterfront Place. Sir Humphrey would greet him bysaying, ‘Good morning, Assistant Treasurer. Congratulations on your appointment.’ Mr Dutton mightsay, ‘Why, thank you, Sir Humphrey. Sorry I am late. The commute in from Pine Rivers was terrible.’ SirHumphrey would say, ‘Yes, Minister. Imagine how much the cost of fuel for regular commuters must beslugging families.’ Mr Dutton might say ‘Yes, Sir Humphrey, just imagine—and imagine if you had to payfor the fuel!’

Sir Humphrey would say, ‘Anyway, Minister. Enough small talk about the minutiae of real people’slives. We have a proposal for you which we think to be entirely sensible.’ Mr Dutton would say, ‘Yes, SirHumphrey? I am all ears.’ Sir Humphrey would say, ‘Well, we think it is time to get rid of this silly littlesop of a program called the Fuel Sales Grants Scheme. I mean, really, Minister, it is rather annoying tohave to keep administering—quite frightful, really—and we thought we could, well, as it were, kill twobirds with one stone.’ Mr Dutton would say, ‘Tell me more, Sir Humphrey.’ Sir Humphrey would say,‘Well, we could kill it off and pretend that the money we would save would be spent on roads.’ Mr Duttonwould say, ‘Yes, good idea, Sir Humphrey. There seems to be a bit of clamouring on that point. I recallsomething about Ipswich in the deep recess of my mind.’ Sir Humphrey would say, ‘As you would,Minister. So, can I take it you are in agreement?’ Mr Dutton would say, ‘Yes, Sir Humphrey. I thinkadding 1c to 3c per litre to the price of fuel at this time is a grand idea. I mean, petrol is already sky high,so perhaps people won’t notice.’ Sir Humphrey would say, ‘Well, of course, Minister. Right you are.Really, Minister, it does only affect people who have to pay for their petrol and those living on andbeyond the urban fringe who cannot afford to live in the city after all.’

One can imagine new Assistant Treasurer Dutton gazing out at the view from Waterfront Place:‘Yes, Sir Humphrey, I think this is one of those happy occasions where core values are represented insound policy. Please proceed posthaste. This sort of thing ought to really ingratiate me with the Treasuryofficials.’

This is a decision that could only be described as courageous. I repeat the bipartisan call of theinquiry that I chaired for the federal government to abandon its plans to axe this scheme. The GST willbe around on 1 July and this scheme should be as well.

Traveston DamMiss ELISA ROBERTS (Gympie—Ind) (12.34 pm): I take this opportunity to provide members of

the House with an update as to the public’s views regarding the impending Traveston Dam. For therecord, at the time of the announcement I and the mayor of Cooloola were in favour of a new dam as wewere of the belief, as a result of the numerous representations of constituents and the devastatingeffects of drought on farmers over the last five years, that a dam was wanted. However, we were soon torealise that this was not the case. The community, and not only in the primarily affected Mary Valley, wasvehemently opposed to the dam.

I would like to place on record my initial comments to the media on the day of the Premier’s visitto Gympie. What I said was that I supported the dam but, ultimately, it was up to the public and I wouldrepresent their views. If my recollection is correct, this was said to Channel 7. Since the announcementof the dam, an antidam organisation has been set up by Mr Rick Elliott. Interestingly, though, as thelocal member I was banned from the initial public meeting because Mr Elliott did not want it to be madepolitical. Obviously, he is selective with regard to politics as the National Party candidate was allowed toattend. It saddens me, with an issue that is so important to the community, that political games havebeen evident since day one.

At another meeting I was advised that if I was to turn up I should expect a hostile response. WhenI arrived I had a petition which I planned to present to this House. But it should be no surprise togovernment members of this House that I was advised that my petition was not needed as they had aNational Party petition. Apparently, the member for Callide had spent the day with the antidam group.But remember, this is not political. I asked if I could speak at this event—I mean, I am only themember—but I was told by Mr Elliott that I would not be invited to speak. However, common senseprevailed and he was convinced by others to allow both me and the mayor to address the crowd.

Following this meeting and a plan to set up a steering committee, I offered my services as well asthose of my staff and the parliamentary library and access to advisers and ministers. I received noresponse. I believe that the committee has already met and I am still awaiting a reply.

If people like Rick Elliott were genuinely concerned about the dam, they would put politics asideand take advantage of every opportunity and offer of assistance. When I offered to take Mr Elliott tomeet with the Premier to convey his views, his answer was that he did not want to go anywhere with me.Like it or not, I am the member and, despite Mr Elliott’s comments that both Beattie and I will be goneafter the next election, the idea that the National Party will ever be in government in this state is a bit ofa pipedream. Whilst I do not generally support the policies of Peter Beattie, he is the current Premierand to choose to ignore both him and the local member is beyond comprehension.


Finally, after all of this, Mr Elliott has done the ultimate backflip. He was on the radio this morningexpressing his pleasure at the prospect of a huge amount of money being provided to people in thevalley. I guess thou had protested too much. I wonder how those hundreds of people whom he vowed torepresent so that there would be no dam really feel now. Was it not Mr Elliott who said that he wouldhave to be dragged off his property with the media looking on because he was not going anywhere? Itseems that the almighty dollar has dampened his passion, and the old adage that anyone can be boughthas been proven on this day.

Federal BudgetMs NOLAN (Ipswich—ALP) (12.37 pm): This evening, the much talked about federal budget will

be handed down and the nation’s most famous bridesmaid will tell us two things. First, he will bringdown a surplus and ask for thanks that Australia is now net debt free. Second, he will tell us that familiesare better off under the Howard government because the Liberals are, as their election slogan said,‘keeping interest rates low.’ These claims are central to the vision of itself that the Howard governmentwants to present to the world. So, let us have a look at them.

Last Wednesday, the Howard government’s economic record began to hit the skids when thestart of the next downturn was signalled by an interest rate rise designed to manage the inflation causedby rising petrol prices. With further rate hikes widely predicted ahead and the government’s economiccredentials tied to low rates, Costello knows just how bad this could be. He defended with pure attack.On Lateline he stated—The standard variable mortgage is around seven and a half per cent. Under the previous Labor government, it was 12 and threequarter per cent. So, if you were paying the average Labor Party interest rate today on your mortgage, you’d be paying $215 aweek more. That’s a lot on the mortgage.

One can feel the heat of the scare campaign from here. It is a pity for the Liberals, then, that it isnot true. It is not true because while rates might be down, this government has left Australians shackledwith personal debt. When I was elected, a person could buy a family home in Ipswich for $150,000. Now$300,000 is standard fare. This trend has been repeated everywhere: putting paper money in the handsof homeowners but hiking up mortgages for anyone buying a first home or seeking to upgrade.

The Productivity Commission reports that the average house price in Australia has risen underthe Howard government from six times average weekly earnings to nine times average weekly earnings.The average mortgage rose from 2.8 times average annual earnings in 1994 to 4.2 times 10 years later.The truth is that under the Howard government Australians are paying far more interest than they didbefore. Even at the tip of the 1990’s recession Australians were paying nine per cent of householddisposable income on interest. Now the Financial Review reports it at nearly 12 per cent. The debt is notjust on the mortgage. Other consumer debt was steady at about $45 billion from 1990 to 1995 but hasballooned to about $115 million now. In Affluenza Clive Hamilton reports that in the decade to 2002average household debt more than doubled from 56 per cent to 125 per cent of average householdearnings.

Peter Costello is lying to Australians about interest rates because the people are drowning indebt. Australians will not care that the federal government is debt free when higher petrol prices andinterest rates put the squeeze on their already limited discretionary spending.

There are three big causes for the debt explosion and the government has fuelled all three. Firstlythey inherited an economy awash with money. Deregulation, superannuation and a resources boom leftpeople looking for places to invest. While Keating had the nerve to, in his own words, ‘despiv’ theeconomy in the early 1990s, the Howard government has acted like the good times it inherited from himwill never end.

Secondly, as Australian cities sprawl the Howard government has opted right out of city building.They have simply not put money into the kind of infrastructure that prevents costly sprawl. The IpswichMotorway is a prime example.

Thirdly, the Howard government has stoked the culture of greed. Encouraged by a governmentthat talks about wealth not community and strips funding from public health to fund tax cuts for the rich,Australians have just stopped saving. The national savings rate has fallen from 10 per cent of householddisposable income in 1990 to be negative now. While their grandparents saved for a holiday orsomething new for the house, modern Australians whack it on the credit card and head straight down toHarvey Norman for two years interest free.

Early in its term the Howard government ditched a planned increase in compulsorysuperannuation. It was a sign of bad things to come. It will be seen as a mark of this government’sfailure that in this the richest period of our history our nation has no national savings plan.

In the Weekend Australian recently, George Megalogenis wrote that just as the last recession hadbeen politically tied to Keating, so the next would bear Howard’s name. The tragedy is that the Howardgovernment’s blind eye to household debt means that for the average family the next recession will hurtso much more than it ever needed to.

1468 Health Quality and Complaints Commission Bill 09 May 2006

HEALTH QUALITY AND COMPLAINTS COMMISSION BILL

First ReadingHon. S ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Health) (12.42 pm): I present a bill for an act

to establish the Health Quality and Complaints Commission, to improve the quality of health servicesand to provide for the monitoring of the quality of health services and the management of healthcomplaints, and for other purposes. I present the explanatory notes and I move—That the bill be now read a first time.

Motion agreed to.

Second ReadingHon. S ROBERTSON (Stretton—ALP) (Minister for Health) (12.43 pm): I move—

That the bill be now read a second time.

The Health Quality and Complaints Commission Bill 2006 is an important step towards restoringaccountability and trust in public health services in Queensland. The bill establishes an independentHealth Quality and Complaints Commission to monitor the quality of health services and managecomplaints.

The commission will incorporate the health complaints functions of the existing Health RightsCommission and will have expanded scope to set health care standards and monitor, investigate andreport on the quality of health services.

The commission will be the first body of its kind in Australia. The bill specifies that most of the actwill commence on 1 July this year. One provision will commence on proclamation.

In anticipation of the bill, the government has already advertised the important roles ofcommissioner and up to seven assistant commissioners who will function as a board of directors for thenew commission. The government has sought expressions of interest from suitably qualified people whocan steer the commission as an independent watchdog of the health system. Appointments of the part-time commissioner and assistant commissioners will be made in late June in time for commencement ofthe new commission on 1 July.

The work of the commission will be carried out by the office of the commission, comprising a chiefexecutive and other staff, including the current staff of the Health Rights Commission. The bill ensuresthe commission’s independence. The bill specifies that the commission, and its chief executive, must actindependently, impartially, and in the public interest. The bill also specifies that the chief executive issubject to the direction of the commission, not the minister.

Also, the commission can at any time prepare a report about the quality of services provided at apublic hospital, for example, and ask the minister to table it in the parliament. If asked by thecommission, the minister must table the report.

The bill requires the commission to establish a consumer advisory committee and a clinicaladvisory committee. The committees will allow for representation of a broad range of interests and willbe an important source of advice to the commission.

The bill defines which health services the commission can monitor under its quality functions andabout which it can receive complaints. They include—• public and private sector health services;• individual registered health practitioners such as doctors, dentists and chiropractors;• non-registered health practitioners such as audiologists and socials workers in health services;

and• alternatives and complementary health providers.

The bill places health service providers under a duty to establish, maintain and implementprocesses to improve the quality of services. The duty extends to processes to monitor the quality of theservices they provide and to protect the health and wellbeing of consumers of their services. Thecommission will also be able to establish standards about how providers may comply with this duty.

The commission will set standards about a broad range of matters relevant to the delivery ofhealth services, taking into consideration international and national standards and benchmarks. Inpractice, it is expected that the commission will avoid duplicating work done by organisations that setstandards for aspects of health care and will adopt existing standards if the commission considers theyare suitable.

09 May 2006 Health Quality and Complaints Commission Bill 1469

Due to the time, I seek leave to incorporate the remainder of my second reading speech inHansard.

Leave granted.Before making a standard, the Commission will be required to consult with those likely to be affected by a standard. It must maintain a clearly understandable website containing its standards, and must have a process for reviewing standards.One of the Commission’s key functions in the Bill is to monitor health service providers’ compliance with their duty to implementprocesses to improve the quality of their services.To do this, the Bill provides the Commission with powers to require information to be provided and to initiate investigations withoutthe need for a complaint.The Bill also allows Commission officers to enter health service facilities with 24-hours notice for the purpose of monitoringcompliance with health services providers’ duty to improve the quality of services.Mr Speaker, I am confident that the Bill contains the necessary powers for the Commission to assess the quality of servicesagainst Commission standards.However, there is no internationally accepted approach to assessment of the adequacy of healthy services’ quality assuranceprocesses.One of the challenges for the new commission will be to work with other agencies—such as the newly established AustralianCommission for Safety and Quality in Healthcare—to develop effective methods of assessing the quality assurance processes ofhealth services in Queensland.Mr Speaker, the Bill provides for the Commission to maintain effective links with health service providers and organisations thathave an interest in the provision of health services.I expect the Commission will endeavour to work collaboratively with health services providers and that these providers, includingQueensland Health, will fully cooperate with the Commission in improving the quality of health services.The Commission will determine the detail of its approach to monitoring the quality of services.The Bill provides for the Commission to report on a health service provider’s failure to comply with their duty to implementprocesses to improve the quality of services, which could include a failure to comply with relevant commission standards.The Commission may give its report to the provider, their employer, a registration board and other entities and to the Minister.Reports must be tabled if requested by the Commission. The Bill provides for the Commission to report on its investigations andenable it to give a special report to the Minister at any time, for tabling in Parliament.It would be open to the Commission to report on any matter relevant to its activities including comparative reporting on the qualityof health services against international and national benchmarks.The Bill recognises that complaints and problems in the health system can require the involvement of a number of publicauthorities, and requires the Commission to maintain cooperation with agencies such as the ombudsman and the coroner.With powers to initiate investigations and powers to continue dealing with a matter after referring it to another body, theCommission will be able to coordinate timely completion of complex matters that require the involvement of more than onestatutory body.Mr Speaker, the Bill provides for two types of complaints—health service complaints and health quality complaints.A health service complaint is made by a consumer or their representative about the service they received.It must be made within one year of the consumer becoming aware of the incident. However, this limit does not apply to seriousmatters that may lead to suspension or deregistration of a registered health practitioner.A health quality complaint however, can be made by anyone, including staff, about any aspect of the quality of one or more healthservices.There is no time limit on the making of a complaint and the Commission must deal with a complaint in a way that is consistent withprotecting the public and improving the quality of health services.Consistent with the Forster Review recommendations, the Commission will promote direct resolution of health service complaintsby the provider when this is practical and reasonable.The Bill provides for the Commission to resolve health service complaints informally, through conciliation, investigation, referral toa registration board or other body, or conduct a public inquiry into serious matters.To improve complaint management by providers, the commission may make a standard about complaint management processes.The Bill also provides for the Commission to nominate to the Minister people suitable for membership of District Health Councils.This implements the Forster recommendation and provides for independent recruitment of potential district health councilmembers.Mr Speaker, this Bill is introduced at a time of significant and important developments in improving the quality and safety of healthservices.The Beattie Government is continuing to address issues highlighted by both the Davies Commission of Inquiry and the ForsterReview of Health Systems to improve the quality of health services.In closing, Mr Speaker, the new Health Quality and Complaints Commission will be an independent monitoring watchdog forhealth services in Queensland, and an independent complaints handling body.The Commission’s work will ultimately result in better quality health services in Queensland, and increase Queenslanders’confidence in those services.I commend the Bill to the House.

Debate, on motion of Mr Lingard, adjourned.

1470 Mineral Resources and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 09 May 2006

MINERAL RESOURCES AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL

First ReadingHon. H PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Water)

(12.47 pm): I present a bill for an act to amend the Mineral Resources Act 1989, and for other purposes.I present the explanatory notes and I move—That the bill be now read a first time.

Motion agreed to.

Second ReadingHon. H PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Water)

(12.47 pm): I move—That the bill be now read a second time.

The Mineral Resources and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2006 will authorise theestablishment of a significant part of the legislative framework to be used to facilitate the development ofthe Aurukun bauxite resource in Cape York. The resource has been estimated to contain more than480 million tonnes of dry beneficiated bauxite and is one of a limited number of large bauxite deposits inthe world currently available for ownership and development. The state is seeking to secure thedevelopment of a new bauxite mine and new downstream processing capacity in Queensland andrelated infrastructure.

The Aurukun project is a significant commercial development for Queensland which will providelong-term economic, social and financial benefits for the state and the local region, including theIndigenous parties. Queensland stands to gain thousands of construction jobs and hundreds of long-term jobs for regional Queenslanders and a solid income stream to help pay for essential services suchas health, education and police.

An approved two-stage competitive bidding process was utilised to identify a preferred developerwith an acceptable development proposal. In September 2005 the government announcedinternationally its invitation to lodge expressions of interest for development of the Aurukun bauxiteresource and published the expression of interest document. Bidders who lodged an expression ofinterest and who paid a lodgement fee and entered into a deed of confidentiality were provided with aformal request for a proposal, information memorandum and bauxite samples.

The expression of interest generated significant interest, both international and local. By theclosing date, a total of 10 bidders were qualified and confirmed as commercial participants in the bidprocess. Bidders had until 30 January 2006 to submit a provisional proposal. By the closing date, thestate had received two provisional proposals. The government’s evaluation committee, assisted by theAurukun project team and oversighted by the probity auditor, assessed the proposals in accordancewith the evaluation guidelines.

Following this assessment, the evaluation committee recommended that only Chalco be short-listed as a bidder on the basis that its proposal had adequately addressed the state’s evaluation criteria.In terms of the evaluation criteria, Chalco’s proposal was assessed as passing all the threshold criteriaand meeting the requirements of three key elements, including commitment to project delivery andtimeliness of development, the state’s interest and Indigenous arrangements.

Stage 2 of the bid process involved the preparation and lodgement of final proposals by short-listed bidders and for the state to select a preferred developer on the merits of the submitted finalproposals. Chalco was invited to submit a final proposal and to conclude a development agreement withthe state.

The Aurukun community representatives have also played an important role in the biddingprocess, and the community stands to gain major benefits from the development. The Wik and Wik Waypeoples are the native title holders of the Aurukun resource area, and the Aurukun Shire Council, whoseconstituency consists predominantly of the Wik and Wik Way peoples, is the lessee of the majority of theAurukun resource area. Through the development, the government aims to establish sustainablepartnerships between the preferred developer and the Aurukun Indigenous community to provide long-term economic and social benefits for the region.

To enable the requisite feasibility study to be conducted for the development, a mineraldevelopment licence is to be issued to the preferred developer over the whole or part of the Aurukunresource. However, at present the Mineral Resources Act 1989 does not provide for the grant of amineral development licence to a party selected by the government through a competitive biddingprocess or for that mineral development licence to be subject to compliance with a development

09 May 2006 Criminal Code Amendment Bill 1471

agreement. Subsequently, it is necessary to amend the Mineral Resources Act 1989 to provide thenecessary legislative framework to facilitate the development of the Aurukun project.

In general, the bill will provide commercial certainty for the preferred developer and will ensurethat the developer has the necessary mining tenure to fulfil its contractual arrangements with the state.The bill makes the changes necessary to support the particular commercial requirements of the projectwhile still retaining the state’s administrative mining processes. I seek leave to have the remainder of mysecond reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted. In particular, it will allow the grant of a mineral development licence to the preferred developer over the whole or part of theAurukun resource without the usual prerequisite tenure of an exploration permit, and will also allow the grant of a mining lease tothe preferred developer.

The Bill will also protect the commercial interests of the Aurukun project and prevent other parties from competing for anexploration permit over land within the Aurukun resource area.

In addition, the legislation will amend the definition of the Aurukun project and refine the limits and application of other legislationwith respect to the Aurukun project.

Another effect of the Bill is that the Judicial Review Act 1991 will not apply to a decision under the Mineral Resources Act 1989 togrant a mineral development licence to the preferred developer.

The removal of the right to judicial review is an approach that has been previously agreed to by parliament on the basis of theeconomic importance and significant capital requirements of such projects and the need to limit the ability of third parties tounreasonably delay the development and operation of such projects.

The Government is firmly committed to the economic development of regional Queensland and the State as a whole.

In this regard, the Bill is also being used as a vehicle to make a minor but necessary amendment to the State Development andPublic Works Organisation Act 1971 to support the development of the planned water grid in South East Queensland.

The minor amendment is proposed to the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971 to expand the definition ofa local body to include a company wholly owned by local governments and/or the State Government.

This amendment is necessary to ensure that the Coordinator-General can use existing powers to fast-track the development ofpipeline projects being implemented by SEQWater and its subsidiary, the Southern Regional Water Pipeline Company, to deal withthe current unprecedented drought.

The development of the Aurukun bauxite resource will provide opportunities to increase economic benefits to regional areas andprovide a sustainable source of demand for services in and around Cape York.

The Aurukun project will also have a positive flow-on effect for Queenslanders as a whole, enhancing Queensland’sposition among the most important mineral provinces in the world.

Another significant commercial development that promises to bring significant economic benefits to the State is the $3 billionPapua New Guinea gas pipeline project.

This exciting project, which the Government has actively supported, promises to create healthy gas competition and a readysupply of gas for Queensland’s mining, manufacturing, energy and industrial sectors.

As part of facilitating the pipeline project, amendments are required to the Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act 2004 toclarify the application of pipeline licensing to the area in the Torres Strait within Queensland’s territorial waters, but offshore.

However, the Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act 2004 was never intended to apply to offshore pipelines.

Instead, the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982 was meant to apply and refers jurisdiction to the Commonwealth which hasa fully developed national regime for offshore pipelines.

To provide legislative certainty to the Papua New Guinea pipeline proponents, the Mineral Resources and Other LegislationAmendment Bill 2006 will amend the Petroleum and Gas (Production and Safety) Act and the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act.

These amendments must be passed by September 2006 as needed by the Papua New Guinea pipeline proponents.

Overall, the Bill provides a number of amendments that are necessary to facilitate the development of the Aurukun resource andprovide legislative certainty for the Papua New Guinea pipeline proponents.

It also reaffirms this Government’s priorities of increasing economic, social and financial development and strengthening regionalQueensland.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Debate, on motion of Mr Lingard, adjourned.

CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT BILL

First ReadingHon. LD LAVARCH (Kurwongbah—ALP) (Minister for Justice and Attorney-General) (12.53 pm):

I present a bill for an act to amend the Criminal Code, and for other purposes. I present the explanatorynotes, and I move—That the bill be now read a first time.

Motion agreed to.

1472 Criminal Code Amendment Bill 09 May 2006

Second Reading

Hon. LD LAVARCH (Kurwongbah—ALP) (Minister for Justice and Attorney-General) (12.53 pm):I move—That the bill be now read a second time.

The powers, rights and immunities which are collectively referred to as ‘parliamentary privilege’took centuries to evolve. They were won incrementally by the English parliament, particularly by theHouse of Commons. They underpin the Westminster system of government. Perhaps the single mostimportant parliamentary privilege is that members of parliament are free to speak in the parliamentwithout the fear or risk of being sued or prosecuted. The primacy of parliament over the Crown isreflected in the United Kingdom’s Bill of Rights of 1688. Article 9 of the UK Bill of Rights provides—That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court orplace out of Parliament.

The powers, privileges and immunities enjoyed by the English House of Commons are the sameas those enjoyed by the Queensland Legislative Assembly, its members and committees. Thisreplication occurred originally through section 40A of the Queensland Constitution Act 1867. Thissection was added to the act in 1978. Since then, Queensland’s constitutional and parliamentary lawshave been consolidated in the Constitution of Queensland Act 2001 and the Parliament of QueenslandAct 2001. Those same privileges are included in the most recent acts.

Section 8(1) of the Parliament of Queensland Act 2001 provides that the freedom of speech anddebates or proceedings in the Assembly cannot be impeached or questioned in any court or place out ofthe Assembly. To remove doubt, section 8(2) declares that subsection (1) is intended to have the sameeffect as article 9 of the Bill of Rights of 1688.

Article 9 of the Bill of Rights is also expressly preserved by section 16 of the CommonwealthParliamentary Privileges Act 1987. Offences of the type set out in chapter 8 of Queensland’s CriminalCode, including section 57, are treated in the United Kingdom as breaches of the privileges ofparliament and dealt with accordingly. Their inclusion in Queensland’s Criminal Code appears to havebeen in response to several decisions of the Privy Council in the 19th century. The Privy Council heldthat the powers of the Legislative Assembly were only such as were necessary to the existence of thebody and the proper exercise of its functions. The court held that the powers did not extend to thepunishment of a contempt or the unconditional suspension of a member during the pleasure of theAssembly.

The inclusion in 1978 of section 40A in the Constitution Act 1867 ensures there is no doubt aboutthe power of the parliament of Queensland to legislate to allow punishment for contempt of parliament. Itfollows that the original reasons for the inclusion of section 57 in the Criminal Code are no longer valid.There is no equivalent to section 57 in the Commonwealth legislation. Article 9 of the Bill of Rights isexpressly preserved by section 16 of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987. Forexample, it is clear from section 16 of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 that thegiving of evidence to a parliamentary committee is a proceeding in parliament which cannot beimpeached in any court. Section 57 of the Criminal Code provides that any person who knowingly givesfalse evidence, in the course of an examination before the Legislative Assembly or a committee of theLegislative Assembly, is guilty of a crime and is liable to seven years imprisonment.

The Parliament of Queensland Act 2001 provides that the same behaviour is a contempt ofparliament, to be dealt with by this parliament. It follows that section 57 of the Criminal Code isinconsistent with a fundamental tenet of the Westminster system, embodied in section 8 of theParliament of Queensland Act 2001. This tenet is that debates or proceedings in parliament cannot beimpeached or questioned in any court or place out of the parliament.

A criminal provision such as section 57, which allows the possibility of the prosecution of amember for what that member says in the House, is inconsistent with the principle established by article9 of the UK Bill of Rights of 1688—a principle expressly preserved in section 8 of the Parliament ofQueensland Act 2001. Accordingly, the bill repeals section 57 of the Criminal Code to ensure that theprinciple inherent in article 9 of the Bill of Rights is preserved and reinforced.

For members, this confirms that Queensland’s parliament operates in the same way as the Houseof Commons, the federal houses of parliament and other Australian states and territories. Parliamenthas primacy and is responsible for disciplining its members. For nonmembers, the position will be thesame as for the federal houses of parliament. Members and nonmembers will continue to be liable to bedealt with for contempt of parliament under the Parliament of Queensland Act 2001. Members andnonmembers would be subject to the same sanctions to be imposed by parliament. Those sanctions areset out in the standing rules and orders of the Legislative Assembly. Sanctions include the imposition ofa fine of up to $2,000. If a fine is not paid, the person involved can be imprisoned.

09 May 2006 Ministerial Statement 1473

Two other sections of the Criminal Code, sections 56 and 58, are also being repealed for thesame reason as section 57 is being repealed. This is because offences against both sections are moreproperly dealt with as a contempt under the Parliament of Queensland Act 2001. Consequentialamendments are also made to section 36(2)(b) and (2)(c) of the Parliament of Queensland Act 2001.These sections refer in their footnotes to sections 57 and 58 of the Criminal Code. I commend the bill tothe House.

Debate, on motion of Mr Lingard, adjourned. Sitting suspended from 1.00 pm to 2.30 pm.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Beaconsfield Mine RescueHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.30 pm), by leave: I know I speak on

behalf of this House and all Queenslanders in expressing relief that Todd Russell and Brant Webb havenot only survived their ordeal after 14 nights underground, but have walked out unharmed and in goodspirits. Their courage and true Australian sense of humour certainly carried them through, as did thesupport they received from family, friends, colleagues and their community.

The nation and the world had their eyes on Beaconsfield as we waited anxiously for news of theminers’ rescue. There every step of the way was the hardworking Australian Workers Union, of whichboth miners are members. The AWU worked around the clock to ensure the rescue occurred as quicklyand safely as possible, keeping family, friends, the community and all of us up to date on its progressand the wellbeing of the trapped miners.

Queensland has a strong connection to Brant Webb. His mother, Christa Jeffries, lives inAtherton; his father in Agnes Waters; and his aunt, Corrine Mitchell, in Bundaberg. I know the Webbfamily is very grateful for the assistance the AWU provided in flying Brant’s father and stepmother toTasmania, and to the mine for flying his mother, her partner and Brant’s aunt there to await his safereturn.

I congratulate all involved in the rescue and send this House’s warmest regards to Todd Russelland Brant Webb, their families and all the people of Beaconsfield as they celebrate this incredible storyof Australian survival. However, in this joyous time, we must also remember the family of the third miner,Larry Knight, whose funeral will be held this afternoon. Mr Knight, a married father of three, usuallyworked in the cage that saved his mates. But on the day of the tremor that brought down the shaft heswitched places with one of them so he could control the machine from the cabin, a decision that costhim his life. All three had been working on installing wire mesh on the mine walls, a process designed toprotect workers from rock falls like the one that struck on Anzac Day. Our prayers and condolences goto his family.


Director-General’s ReserveHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.32 pm), by leave: As members are

aware, the Director-General’s Reserve provides the Premier of the day with the capacity and flexibility torespond effectively to emergent needs and events. Today I can provide an update to the House onexpenditure over the last 2½ years from the Director-General’s Reserve of the Department of thePremier and Cabinet.

The nature and type of the projects which are funded by the Director-General’s Reserve is heavilyinfluenced by community need. As Premier, my ability to respond in a timely way to emerging issues isdependent on immediate access to an appropriate level of resources. This is particularly the case withthe unforeseen events which require expeditious decisions and actions. The Director-General’s Reserveis also available to provide for whole-of-government contributions to charitable organisations anddisaster appeals and to provide assistance to local governments, community groups, deserving causesand whole-of-government initiatives. A total of $14.371 million was budgeted for the Director-General’sReserve in 2005-06. This was made up of the $10 million allocation for the reserve with a committedfunding carryover from 2004-05 of $3.371 million. A further $1 million was added to the fund to providefor the government contribution to the Cyclone Larry Relief Appeal. The uncommitted balance as at 28April 2006 is $4.507 million.

Total expenditure from the Director-General’s Reserve amounted to $8.998 million in 2004-05and $3.712 million in 2003-04. Significant expenditure has been incurred from the Director-General’sReserve in recent years in providing assistance to victims of the Asian tsunami and, more recently,Tropical Cyclone Larry. The Director-General’s Reserve has also been used to support Queensland’s

1474 Ministerial Statement 09 May 2006

representation at World Expo 2006 in Aichi in Japan, and Queensland athletes representing Australia atthe Melbourne Commonwealth Games and the 2008 Beijing Olympics. It has also been used to drivesignificant public sector reforms such as the Forster review of Queensland Health systems. I seek leaveto incorporate in Hansard for the information of members details of expenditure from the Director-General’s Reserve for 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 as at 28 April 2006.

Leave granted.

2003-04 Amount Reason (GST Exclusive) Date Approved Approved By

St John's Cathedral Restoration 200,000.00 10-Oct-96 Governor in CouncilQueensland Olympic Council - preparation for Athens 2004 100,000.00 19-Jul-01 PremierReconciliation Action Plan 30,000.00 16-Aug-01 Director-GeneralQueensland Paralympic Council - preparation for Athens 2004 70,000.00 23-Aug-01 PremierWoodford Folk Festival 5,000.00 05-Sep-01 Director-GeneralQueensland State Library Political Archives Project 56,000.00 27-Sep-01 PremierPromotion of Public Art 47,500.00 01-Oct-01 Premier

Scholarship - Australian & New Zealand School of Government 60,000.00 03-Jun-02 PremierGeneral Douglas Macarthur Museum establishment 50,000.00 31-Oct-02 Governor in Council2003 Premier's Awards for Community Business Partnerships 15,000.00 26-Nov-02 PremierDance North 15,000.00 20-Jan-03 PremierChristmas Donation 2002 - UNICEF 3,500.00 19-Feb-03 Director-GeneralChristmas Donation 2003 - UNICEF 3,500.00 19-Feb-03 Director-GeneralAustralian Sugar Industry Museum 10,000.00 23-Feb-03 Director-GeneralSt Mary's Parish Church Bowen 20,000.00 23-Feb-03 PremierScholarship - Australian & New Zealand School of Government 58,000.00 27-Feb-03 PremierSurf Life Saving Rescue Appeal 2003 50,000.00 05-Mar-03 PremierIdeas at the Powerhouse sponsorship 200,000.00 26-Mar-03 Premier2003 World Festival of Magic 1,500.00 28-Mar-03 PremierHalloran's Hill Lookout establishment - Atherton Shire Council 30,000.00 09-Apr-03 PremierWoodford Folk Festival 230,000.00 01-May-03 Director-GeneralYouth Space Forum 2,500.00 22-May-03 Director-GeneralQueensland Police Citizen's Youth Supporters Club Fundraiser 909.09 27-Jun-03 PremierCape York Institute for Policy and Leadership 50,000.00 04-Jul-03 Director-GeneralNational Youth Science Forum sponsorship 500.00 07-Jul-03 PremierPoss Appeal - Epilepsy Queensland 1,000.00 09-Jul-03 PremierRio Tinto Child Health Initiative 25,000.00 10-Jul-03 PremierAustralian South Sea Islander Community Foundation 50,000.00 14-Jul-03 Director-GeneralInternational River Foundation 75,000.00 31-Jul-03 Director-General2003 Sports Federation of Queensland - Queensland Sports Awards 6,800.00 05-Aug-03 Director-General


Brisbane Tramway Museum 10,000.00 05-Aug-03 Director-GeneralSupporting the Brain Disease Challenge 500.00 18-Aug-03 Director-GeneralChildren's Circus Spectacular - SIDS and Kids Queensland 500.00 21-Aug-03 PremierChristian Television Australia 12,000.00 21-Aug-03 PremierQueensland Council of Parents and Citizen's Association 54th AGM & Conference 5,000.00 21-Aug-03 Premier2003 Children's Movie Day - Rotary Club of Brisbane West 954.54 25-Aug-03 PremierChildren's Christmas Magic Extravaganza - Children's Leukaemia and Cancer 1,120.00 26-Aug-03 PremierSecurity Risk Management Tool for Local Government 25,000.00 01-Sep-03 Director-GeneralSpecial Children's Christmas Party 2003 200.00 17-Sep-03 PremierSacred Heart Cathedral restoration - Townsville 100,000.00 25-Sep-03 PremierAnti-Poverty Week 2003 2,500.00 29-Sep-03 Premier11th Children's Film Festival - Rotary Club of Ipswich 1,590.91 03-Oct-03 Premier

2003 Children's Christmas Circus Spectacular - Mater Children's Hospital 1,381.82 08-Oct-03 PremierSpecial Children's Christmas Party Mackay 2003 200.00 08-Oct-03 Premier2003 Premier's Senior Christmas Concerts 30,000.00 08-Oct-03 PremierCommunity Broadcasting Association Conference 2003 10,000.00 10-Oct-03 Director-GeneralThe Smith Family - Christmas Appeal 25,000.00 03-Nov-03 PremierCrown of Thorns Starfish Mitigation Project 6,900.00 05-Nov-03 Director-General

Royal Agricultural Society of Queensland - Toowoomba Support Package 150,000.00 12-Nov-03 PremierStrategic Management Review of the QAO 32,000.00 13-Nov-03 Governor in CouncilLifeline Brisbane - Annual Christmas Donation 25,000.00 18-Nov-03 PremierSociety of St Vincent De Paul - Annual Christmas Donation 25,000.00 18-Nov-03 PremierThe Salvation Army - Annual Christmas Donation 25,000.00 18-Nov-03 PremierMary Valley Heritage Railway Museum 50,000.00 27-Nov-03 PremierDemocracy Drama Project - Queensland Theatre Company 100,000.00 30-Nov-03 PremierHear & Say Centre for Deaf Children 35,000.00 01-Dec-03 Director-GeneralKoala Enhanced Genetic Exchange Program 50,000.00 03-Dec-03 Director-General2003 Girl in a Million Quest 20,000.00 08-Dec-03 PremierCommunity Cabinet Meeting - Suncorp Stadium 4,200.00 11-Dec-03 Director-GeneralANZAC Square - Shrine of Remembrance Restoration 438,753.00 18-Dec-03 Governor in CouncilFuture Problem Solving - St Joseph's College 1,000.00 18-Dec-03 PremierCIRYAR Suicide Prevention Program 30,000.00 19-Dec-03 PremierBli Bli Processing Plant - New Transformer 7,192.00 22-Dec-03 PremierSpringbrook Area Land Use Study 20,000.00 06-Jan-04 Director-General


Lyngbya/Toxic Algae Cleanup 100,000.00 14-Jan-04 Director-General2004 St Patrick's Day Parade 25,000.00 19-Feb-04 PremierYoung Historian Award 650.00 20-Feb-04 PremierMuscular Dystrophy - Bow Tie Day 20,000.00 23-Feb-04 PremierSt Joseph's Festival 15,000.00 02-Mar-04 Director-General2004 Children's Circus Extravaganza - Lions Club 1,490.91 10-Mar-04 PremierCrown of Thorns Starfish Mitigation Project 250,000.00 18-Mar-04 Governor in CouncilCircus Quirkus 681.82 31-Mar-04 PremierRed Cross Calling Appeal 2004 25,000.00 31-Mar-04 PremierLions Club International - donation 18,181.82 07-Apr-04 PremierPaniyiri (Greek) 2004 Festival 25,000.00 07-Apr-04 PremierQueensland Police Citizens Youth Supporters Club Fundraiser 4,545.45 08-Apr-04 PremierImplementation of Child Protection Reforms 355,964.00 22-Apr-04 Governor in CouncilQueensland Government Reconciliation Awards for Business 90,000.00 23-Apr-04 PremierChildren's Circus Attendance - Abused Child Trust 1,600.00 27-Apr-04 PremierRoyal Life Saving Society 10,000.00 27-Apr-04 PremierLifeline Appeal - Donation 500.00 06-May-04 PremierTip Byrne Testimonial Youth Assistance Fund 5,000.00 17-May-04 PremierQueensland Deaflympic Appeal 25,000.00 04-Jun-04 PremierChildren's Movies - Rotary Club of Brisbane West 1,200.00 15-Jun-04 PremierPoppy Appeal Donation 25,000.00 02-Oct-04 Premier

TOTAL EXPENDITURE 2003-04 $ 3,712,515.36


St John's Cathedral Restoration 400,000.00 10-Oct-96 Governor in CouncilAustralia and New Zealand School of Government 118,000.00 03-Jun-02 Premier2004 International Biology Olympiad 15,000.00 15-Oct-02 PremierCape York Institute for Policy and Leadership 50,000.00 04-Jul-03 Director-GeneralRio Tinto Child Health Initiative 25,000.00 10-Jul-03 PremierWoodford Folk Festival - Infrastructure Development 420,000.00 11-Sep-03 Governor in CouncilCrown of Thorns Starfish Mitigation Program 500,000.00 11-Sep-03 Governor in CouncilInternational Congress of Entomology XXII 2004 13,636.36 16-Sep-03 PremierStrategic Review of the Queensland Audit Office 99,344.00 23-Dec-03 Director-General

8th World Congress on Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 10,000.00 16-Mar-04 Premier8th World Leisure Congress 10,000.00 16-Apr-04 PremierCo-sponsor of 2004 National Conference on Tourism Futures 10,000.00 04-May-04 PremierContribution to Long Tan Community Development Project, Vung Tau Province Vietnam 10,000.00 04-May-04 Director-GeneralGrowing the Smart State for 2004-05 100,000.00 25-May-04 Premier2004 Queensland Sports Awards 7,000.00 03-Jun-04 Premier2004 Premier's Senior Christmas Concerts 2004 30,000.00 15-Jun-04 Director-GeneralForum of Federations - membership fee 5,000.00 17-Jun-04 Director-GeneralMulticultural Strategy: Brisbane Multicultural Festival 200,000.00 01-Jul-04 PremierMulticultural Strategy: Multicultural Awareness Project 35,000.00 01-Jul-04 PremierMulticultural Strategy: Photographic Award systems 125,000.00 01-Jul-04 PremierContribution to the Smart Return Fellowship Scheme 2004-05 25,000.00 05-Jul-04 PremierQueensland Blue Light Association - Silver Corporate Membership 909.09 15-Jul-04 Premier2004 World Magic Festival 1,590.91 22-Jul-04 Premier2004 Special Children's Christmas Party - Rockhampton 200.00 22-Jul-04 Premier2005 Special Children's Christmas Party - Rockhampton 200.00 22-Jul-04 PremierNational Country Music Muster - Gympie 31,363.64 23-Jul-04 Director-General2004 Special Children's Christmas Party - Brisbane 200.00 23-Jul-04 Premier2004 Little Poss Appeal 1,000.00 23-Jul-04 PremierChina Central Television Executive Visit to Queensland 4,545.45 04-Aug-04 Premier2004 Special Children's Christmas Party - Nambour 200.00 06-Aug-04 Premier


2004 Girl in a Million Quest 20,000.00 09-Aug-04 PremierTransport of "OLGAS" Artwork 250.00 10-Aug-04 Director-GeneralQueensland Future - Building on the Smart State Strategy 250,000.00 13-Aug-04 Director-General2004 Surf Life Saving Rescue Appeal 50,000.00 16-Aug-04 Premier2004 Special Children's Christmas Party - Mackay 200.00 20-Aug-04 Premier5th Community Cabinet Meeting 5,437.28 23-Aug-04 Director-General5th Community Cabinet Meeting 525.45 23-Aug-04 Director-GeneralChristian Television Australia 13,636.36 27-Aug-04 Premier2005 World Expo, Japan-Qld Govt Project Plan - Staging of an Australian Pavilion at the Expo 350,000.00 27-Aug-04 PrmierMary Poppins Commemmorative Statue - Maryborough 5,000.00 08-Sep-04 PremierSt Patrick's Day Parade 25,000.00 22-Sep-04 Premier2004 Poppy Appeal Donation 25,000.00 22-Sep-04 Premier2004 Bush Tucker Week in France 4,363.64 30-Sep-04 PremierSt Mary's Catholic Precinct Conservation Appeal 50,000.00 05-Oct-04 Premier2004 Olympic "Thank You" Tour 15,000.00 07-Oct-04 Premier

2004 12th Annual Christmas Childrens Film Festival - RSL Ipswich 1,590.91 14-Oct-04 PremierThe Smith Family - annual Christmas Donation 25,000.00 14-Oct-04 PremierThe Brisbane Institute 50,000.00 18-Oct-04 PremierChildren's Circus Spectacular - SIDS and Kids Queensland 500.00 20-Oct-04 PremierChildrens Christmas Circus Spectacular - Mater Children's Hospital 2,045.45 20-Oct-04 PremierRosies Tapestry Fund 10,000.00 22-Oct-04 Premier2005 QUT Smart Train Project 50,000.00 22-Oct-04 PremierMemorial Bell in Chinatown 15,000.00 25-Oct-04 PremierDrover's Construction Project - Memorial Shed in Camooweal 72,049.10 03-Nov-04 Director-GeneralInternational Riverfoundation 75,000.00 04-Nov-04 Premier150th Celebrations Planning Advisory Committee 93,482.00 11-Nov-04 Director-GeneralAusBiotech CEO Forum 2005 60,000.00 01-Dec-04 PremierBrisbane Combined Unions Choir 12,000.00 01-Dec-04 PremierStrategic Review of the Office of the Governor 36,364.15 07-Dec-04 Director-GeneralThe Salvation Army - annual Christmas donation 25,000.00 07-Dec-04 PremierSociety of St Vincent De Paul - annual Christmas donatijon 25,000.00 07-Dec-04 PremierLifeline Brisbane - Annual Christmas Donation 25,000.00 07-Dec-04 PremierPaniyiri (Greek) 2005 Festival 30,000.00 16-Dec-04 Premier


Multicultural Queensland Policy Review - 2004-05-Making a World of Difference 54,000.00 16-Dec-04 Director-General2004 Christmas Donation - Unicef 3,500.00 17-Dec-04 Director-GeneralAsian Tsunami Relief Support - Australian Red Cross 375,000.00 04-Jan-05 Governor in CouncilAsian Tsunami Relief Support - Care Australia 375,000.00 04-Jan-05 Governor in CouncilAsian Tsunami Relief Support - Unicef 375,000.00 04-Jan-05 Governor in CouncilAsian Tsunami Relief Support - World Vision Australia 375,000.00 04-Jan-05 Governor in CouncilGovernor's Attendance at Australia Week in Los Angeles 47,910.61 10-Jan-05 PremierAustralian Week in Los Angeles 100,000.00 10-Jan-05 PremierSponsorship for the Richard Florida Event 13,000.00 24-Jan-05 Premier

BOLA-Building and Other Legislation Amendment 2002-Stage Two 45,454.54 27-Jan-05 Director-GeneralReunion & Celebrations 467-463 Squadrons Qld 2005 12,305.00 17-Feb-05 PremierChildren's Circus Extravaganza-Lions Club Macgregor 2005 1,636.36 17-Feb-05 PremierQueensland History Teachers - National History Challenge 650.00 21-Feb-05 Premier

Support the Royal Humane Society Australasia 2004-05 activities 4,000.00 07-Mar-05 PremierChildren's Movie Extravaganza-6th Annual celebration-Childhood Cancert Support 2005 1,280.00 07-Mar-05 Premier2nd International Conference on Health Ageing 15,000.00 09-Mar-05 Premier2005 Bow Tie Day 21,909.09 11-Mar-05 PremierQueensland Police Citizen's Youth Club 4,545.45 14-Mar-05 PremierReconciliation Awards for Business 15,000.00 15-Mar-05 PremierLeukaemia Foundation 30th Anniversary funding 25,000.00 16-Mar-05 PremierANZAC Day Commemoration Committee 8,629.33 24-Mar-05 PremierSmart State Strategy - Advertising Campaign 1,029,560.61 29-Mar-05 PremierWorld Trade Organisation Moot Competion 5,000.00 30-Mar-05 Premier2005 Special Children's Christmas Party - Nambour 200.00 04-Apr-05 PremierWorld Braford Congress 2006 30,000.00 06-Apr-05 Premier100 Yrs Rotary Int'l concert Celebration-Rockhampton 5,000.00 08-Apr-05 PremierOzwater Convention-2005 25,000.00 27-Apr-05 Premier

Rotary Club of Toowong-2005 Under Privileged Childrens Spectacular 1,840.91 28-Apr-05 PremierRotary Club of Broadwater Southport-Kokoda Memorial Stage 2 15,000.00 28-Apr-05 PremierChildren's Movie Spectacular 2005 909.09 29-Apr-05 PremierQueensland Museum - ATSIC Centre Media Launch 8,000.00 13-May-05 PremierAPSAG-Aus Pacific Scholar Athlete Games 2006 182,797.12 18-May-05 Director-General

2005 Surf Life Saving Rescue Appeal 50,000.00 18-May-05 Premier2005 Special Children's Christmas Party - Brisbane 200.00 23-May-05 PremierEpilepsy Queensland, Inc 45,000.00 07-Jun-05 Director-GeneralNational Youth Science Forum 5,500.00 08-Jun-05 Premier2005 World Magic Festival 1,590.91 08-Jun-05 Premier2005 Girl in a Million Quest 20,000.00 08-Jun-05 PremierVector Command Simulator - Counter Disaster 22,000.00 09-Jun-05 Director-GeneralAustralia and New Zealand School of Government 180,000.00 09-Jun-05 PremierForster Review of Queensland Health 1,256,000.00 10-Jun-05 Director-General3rd Annual Underprivileged Childrens Circus Extravaganza 2,454.54 20-Jun-05 PremierCroc Convoy 2005 35,700.00 28-Jun-05 PremierEast Timor Eye Program 20,000.00 29-Jun-05 PremierBrisbane Marketing Campaign 500,000.00 30-Jun-05 Governor in Council2005 Little Poss Appeal - Epilepsy Queensland Inc 1,000.00 30-Jun-05 PremierQueens Baton Relay Coordination 7,010.00 18-Jul-05 PremierWorld Indigenous Nations Higher Education Consortium's International Education Collaboration Forum 4,000.00 26-Jul-05 Premier

TOTAL EXPENDITURE 2004-05 $ 8,998,217.35



Rio Tinto Child Health Initiative 25,000.00 27-Jun-2003PremierNATSEM ARC Project 50,000.00 Jul-2003PremierCape York Institute for Policy and Leadership 50,000.00 4-Jul-2003Director-GeneralInternational Riverfoundation 75,000.00 19-Feb-2004PremierCrown of Thorns Starfish Mitigation Program 250,000.00 18-Mar-2004Governor-in-CouncilSmart Return Fellowship Scheme 50,000.00 5-Jul-2004PremierBrisbane Institute 50,000.00 15-Oct-2004PremierMulticultural Queensland Policy Review 162,000.00 27-Jan-2005Director-General2005 Reconciliation Awards for Business 75,000.00 15-Mar-2005PremierToowoomba Carnival of Flowers 60,000.00 21-Mar-2005PremierSmart State Strategy 82,061.20 29-Mar-2005Premier2006 Australian Davos Connection Future Summit 100,000.00 4-Apr-2005PremierLions Club of Australia - 54th National Convention 25,000.00 5-May-2005PremierFar North Qld Plane Crash - assistance to victims relatives 662.05 10-May-2005PremierAustralian Festival of Chamber Music 10,000.00 12-May-2005PremierPremier's Drama Awards 165,000.00 3-Jun-2005PremierAustralian Computer Society Excellence Awards 4,545.45 3-Jun-05PremierOceans and the World's Future -16th Convocation 50,000.00 3-Jun-05PremierANSOG Executive Fellows Program 5,454.55 7-Jun-2005PremierBuilding and Other Legislation Amendment Act 30,000.00 22-Jun-2005Director-GeneralAviation and Aerospace Careers Day 2,000.00 8-Jul-2005Premier2005 Special Children's Christmas Party - Mackay 200.00 11-Jul-2005Premier2005 Queensland Blue Light Associaiton membership 909.09 18-Jul-2005PremierQueens Baton Relay 77,490.00 18-Jul-2005PremierWartburg Bush Festival 2,000.00 22-Jul-2005PremierNational Country Music Muster 130,000.00 25-Jul-2005PremierAcrobatic Fanatics - attend American National Cheerleading Titles 5,000.00 1-Aug-2005PremierMacarthur Museum 100,000.00 3-Aug-2005PremierSenior's Taskforce 65,000.00 4-Aug-2005PremierQueensland Art Gallery 35,000.00 4-Aug-2005Director-General2006 Friendship Day 2,000.00 5-Aug-2005Premier


International Conference on Engaging Communities 1,331.00 10-Aug-2005Director-General

Combined Unions Choir Project 45,454.54 11-Aug-2005PremierIsland of Cinema Festival 4,901.96 12-Aug-2005Director-GeneralQueensland Institute of Medical Research WANTZ Committee 20,000.00 12-Aug-2005PremierKumbari Ave State School - Hydrotherapy Pool Fittings 20,000.00 12-Aug-2005Premier2006 Queensland Sports Awards 7,000.00 18-Aug-2005PremierInternational Marine Protected Area Congress 17,500.00 22-Aug-2005Director-General2006 Paniyiri Festival 30,000.00 22-Aug-2005Director-GeneralTownsville V8 Supercar Street Race 11,600.00 30-Aug-05PremierNational Heart Foundation Doorknock Appeal 50,000.00 30-Aug-2005PremierPremier's address to Public Sector regarding Machinery of Government transfer

3,202.27 2-Sep-2005Director-General

Emerging Pacific Leaders Dialogue 50,000.00 6-Sep-2005PremierPolice Citizens Youth Club 'Cape Indigenous Program' 68,181.82 12-Sep-2005Director-General2005 Mater Foundation Children's Christmas Circus Extravaganza 2,250.00 13-Sep-2005Premier2005 Asia Pacific Cities Summit 125,000.00 14-Sep-2005Premier2005 Premier's Senior Christmas Concerts - Mackay and Ipswich 30,000.00 14-Sep-2005Premier2005 Children's Christmas Magic Extravaganza - Childhood Cancer 1,280.00 23-Sep-2005PremierChristian Television Association 15,000.00 23-Sep-2005Premier2005 Returned Services League Poppy Appeal 25,000.00 26-Sep-2005PremierEpilepsy Queensland 13,636.36 28-Sep-2005PremierNational Counter Terrorism Committee 40,000.00 11-Oct-2005Director-GeneralHealth Recruitment, health reforms, mini-budget communication 1,584,000.00 12-Oct-2005CBRC Decision No 1525

Queensland Library Foundation - community service announcements 20,000.00 25-Oct-2005PremierNational Business Leaders Forum 50,000.00 28-Oct-2005Premier2005 Christmas Donation - Smith Family 25,000.00 2-Nov-2005PremierClinical Oncology Society of Australia Indigenous Health Session 20,036.88 8-Nov-2005PremierSt Paul's Cathedral Restoration 10,000.00 11-Nov-2005Premier2005 Annual Rotary Childrens Christmas Film Fest 2,045.45 24-Nov-2005PremierDance North - Tranzplatform 25,000.00 2-Dec-2005PremierThe Royal Humane Society of Australiasia Inc Donation 4,000.00 12-Dec-2005PremierATSIC Centre Media Launch 2,500.00 13-Dec-2005Premier@ Work and Play, Queensland on Show 14,000.00 13-Dec-2005Premier2005 Christmas Donation - UNICEF 3,500.00 20-Dec-2005Director-General


Mr BEATTIE: I would point out that it is nothing new for the Premier of the day to have access toa contingency fund. The former Premier, Rob Borbidge, had an allocation in his department’scontingency reserve totalling $14.984 million in 1997-98.

Let me just highlight two matters in relation to the reserve for the information of the House.An amount of $1,584,000 was set aside for health recruitment, health reforms and mini-budgetcommunication. I want to make it very clear that health recruitment is a priority of the government. I setthat out and I highlight it to demonstrate that that money did not come out of the Health budget but,rather, it came out of this contingency fund. I made it clear that none of that money would come out ofthe Health budget, and it has not. I highlight that item for the information of the House.

The second thing I highlight to the House is that the money is allocated for a range of things—Queensland Tourism Industry Council training, $165,000; city Botanical Gardens 150th anniversarycelebrations, $87,500; St Patrick’s Day parade, $20,000; Salvation Army, $25,000; St Vincent de Paul,$25,000; and Lifeline also received $25,000. We put a whole lot of money into things like the Island ofCinema Festival, the Queensland Institute of Medical Research and the WANTZ committee. We alsosupported the Combined Unions Choir project at a cost of $45,454. Those are matters which I believeare in the community interest. I sought leave to incorporate this information as I think Queenslandershave a right to know, and they now do.


Health SystemHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.35 pm), by leave: Queensland Health

needs to recruit foreign trained professionals because the federal government has admitted that it hasnot been training enough Australian doctors and that there is a massive shortage of trained nurses.

Under the $6.4 billion health action plan we set an initial target of employing an extra 300 doctors,400 allied health workers and 500 nurses by December this year. I initiated a recruitment campaign in

2006 St Patrick's Day Parade 20,000.00 21-Dec-2005Director-General2006 Reconciliation Awards for Business 45,000.00 6-Jan-2006Director-GeneralReview of Queensland's Signature Arts and Cultural Festivals 30,000.00 12-Jan-2006PremierCommonwealth Games Welcome Home Parade 10,000.00 20-Jan-2006Director-General2006 Croc Festival 39,214.54 2-Feb-2006PremierSupport to Queensland's 2006 Commonwealth Games team 400,000.00 3-Feb-2006Premier2006 Queensland Blue Light Asscoiation Inc membership 909.09 7-Feb-2006Premier2005 Children's Circus Extravaganza - Lions Club 1,636.36 7-Feb-2006PremierSt Andrews Church Restoration 20,000.00 16-Feb-2006Premier2006 Croc Festival Additional Supplementation 18,634.54 28-Feb-2006Premier2008 Queensland Olympic Team 110,000.00 1-Mar-2006Premier2006 Childhood Cancer Children's Movie Extravaganza 1,280.00 1-Mar-2006PremierSt Joseph's Cathedral Restoration 100,000.00 1-Mar-2006Premier2006 Buddha's Birth Day Festival 25,000.00 2-Mar-2006PremierPolice Citizens Youth Club 'Youth at Risk' 4,545.45 6-Mar-2006Premier2006 Muscular Dystrophy Bow Tie Day 21,909.09 7-Mar-2006Premier2006 Victory in Europe Anniversary Commemoration 500.00 8-Mar-2006Premier2006 Red Cross Calling Appeal 25,000.00 15-Mar-2006PremierCyclone Larry Appeal Fund 1,100,000.00 23-Mar-2006Premier2006 Feast of the Three Saints 25,000.00 31-Mar-2006PremierQld Tourism Industry Council Training Train 165,000.00 12-Jun-2006PremierCity Botanical Gardens 150th Anniversary Celebrations 87,500.00 26-Aug-2006PremierBundaberg Multicultual Festival 5,000.00 26-Aug-2006Director-GeneralAmy Gillett Safe Foundation Donation 50,000.00 22-Sep-2006Premier2005 Children's Circus Spectacular - SIDS and Kids 500.00 28-Oct-2006Premier2005 Christmas Donation - St Vincent De Paul 25,000.00 30-Nov-2006Premier2005 Christmas Donation - Salvation Army 25,000.00 30-Nov-2006Premier2005 Christmas Donation - Lifeline 25,000.00 30-Nov-2006Premier

TOTAL EXPENDITURE TO DATE 2005-06 6,462,371.69$


the United Kingdom in September last year with a series of advertisements and functions whichattracted 649 expressions of interest from a wide variety of health professionals in Britain. QueenslandHealth has examined their credentials and carried out interviews and so far 34 doctors have eitherstarted work for us or are being appointed and another 126 doctors are being considered forappointments. Forty-four nurses, allied health workers and dentists have also either been appointed orare going through the same process. These professionals are joining hundreds of others who havejoined Queensland Health. We have already employed a total of 272 extra doctors, 413 extra alliedhealth professionals and 1,082 extra nurses, but we need more. We will have to continue with thisstrategy in the long term because, after agreeing that Australia needs more medical places at ouruniversities, Prime Minister Howard has now rejected the facts presented by states and territories thatAustralia needs an extra 955 places. He is limiting the number of new places to a grossly inadequate400 for the entire country. Queensland, which alone needs 325 extra places, will be lucky if we receive50 places, with 160 already allocated to Victoria.

Mr Howard has been totally unable to explain how he arrived at a figure of 400. It appears to bewithout logic, science or mathematics. What it does mean is that we must build on the relationships thatwe have established with recruitment companies and professional organisations in the UK and increaseour reputation as being a smart career move for British health professionals. I will spend six days inBritain and Ireland from Friday this week driving home this message as part of a major new phase ofQueensland’s recruiting drive, and of course I will report on my full trip to the parliament on my return. Iwill build on the initial impact from last September and demonstrate to recruiting companies over therethat Queensland Health has a long-term interest in employing top-class doctors, nurses and alliedhealth professionals. I will be using my position as Premier to put Queensland and our health systemfirmly in the minds of British doctors, nurses and allied health professionals and major recruitmentcompanies. We are determined that Queensland Health will be the best system in the world. We need tokeep recruiting skilled professionals overseas.

Helping me to recruit still more doctors, nurses and allied health professionals will be: ProfessorKen Donald, Head of the School of Medicine, Queensland University; Dr Bill Glasson, Chair of theMedical Recruitment Advisory Group and a former president of the AMAQ; Jim O’Dempsey, executiveofficer of the Medical Board of Queensland; Dr John Dunning, Medical Director of CardiothoracicSurgery at Queensland Health, whom we recruited from England’s world famous Papworth Hospital; DrBill Beresford, Director of Medical Services, another distinguished doctor we recruited from the UK; andVeronica Casey, chair of nursing in the Division of Medicine, Queensland Health. We will also beaccompanied by my wife, Heather, who, as members know, has considerable experience in health andwho I thought would be of benefit in recruitment.

I will be holding four major recruiting functions for doctors in various parts of the country, and aspecial recruiting function for nurses. I will also be involved in talks between Britain’s General MedicalCouncil and the Medical Board of Queensland aimed at removing hurdles that delay the registration inQueensland of doctors working in the British hospital system. I will visit several hospitals to learn howthey have dealt with the worldwide shortage of doctors by increasing the skills of other health workerssuch as nurses, physiotherapists and radiographers.

I can also reveal that while the Deputy Premier and Treasurer was in Canada she made time tohost a recruitment function for doctors. As a result, 60 doctors have already told Queensland Health thatthey are interested in coming to work in Queensland. Some 20 have been checked and are now beinglinked to available positions and the remaining 40 are still being checked. One doctor has been placedand is due to start work at the Prince Charles Hospital in the cardiology department in January 2007.Five other doctors are in the process of being interviewed by hospitals.

We are also increasing the number of beds in our hospitals. I want to highlight that whenMr Springborg and Mr Quinn were in government they cut bed numbers every year. We are treatingmore patients than ever before and have opened 99 new public hospital beds, with another 170 tocome. Queenslanders can see for themselves that our health action plan is working and is enabling ourhardworking doctors, nurses and allied health workers to deliver a better health system—one that theycan all be proud of. I urge all Queenslanders to check for themselves on the progress by going to theQueensland Health web site at www.health.qld.gov.au and reading the six-month health action planchecklist.


Governor of WashingtonHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.41 pm), by leave: It gives me pleasure

today to welcome to the Speaker’s gallery Governor Christine Gregoire and First Gentleman MikeGregoire of the state of Washington, USA. It is indeed a significant occasion to welcome the Governoron the first ever trade mission from Washington to the Smart State of Queensland. Governor Gregoireand 21 senior government, business, education and life science delegates will see firsthand some of ourstate’s leading technology and research endeavours.


They will hear about the new industries my government has fostered and the traditional industrieswhich are working smarter. They will also visit the University of Queensland, the Queensland Institute ofMedical Research, the Tick Fever Centre of the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries andBoeing Australia’s headquarters here in Brisbane, which plays a significant economic role in ourrespective states.

The reason behind the visit is the governments of Queensland and the state of Washington sharesimilar approaches to making our states globally competitive in the knowledge industries. The Governorand I share the belief that economic prosperity depends on a skilled workforce, smart infrastructureinvestment, strong commitments to research and development and a supportive economic climate.

With this shared vision, I was delighted today to sign a memorandum of understanding withGovernor Gregoire. The MOU will help form collaborative alliances in science education, research andknowledge intensive industries. Initial emphasis will be in the areas of cancer, genomics, agriculturalbiotech, bioengineering, regenerative medicine and tissue engineering, infectious disease andimmunology. Already, Queensland and Washington are working closely on a number of projects.

In Seattle last month, the Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for State Development, Tradeand Innovation, Anna Bligh, announced a $2 million Smart State grant for Queensland and Washingtonscientists to develop early disease detection. I know the Governor also shares an interest in thedevelopment of our wine industry, which is why she will be taking back to Seattle a selection of some ofQueensland’s leading wines. At the formal lunch that the ministry and I hosted the Governor presentedme with a bottle of Washington wine. I have no doubt that it will be as good as ours. We haveexchanged wines.

Mr Livingstone: We will sample it.Mr BEATTIE: No, the member is not getting to sample it, but I will. If the member is nice enough

I am sure the Governor will welcome him in Seattle and he will get his own bottle of wine. I know theGovernor shares an interest in the development of wine. I am sure that will continue.

The Governor and First Gentleman, it is a great pleasure to welcome you both here today. Thankyou for your friendship and generosity. We wish you well for the rest of your trip to Australia. I am surethat our shared bonds and opportunities will continue to create parallel paths of prosperity for thecitizens of our respective states. Good luck.


Water SupplyHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.44 pm), by leave: There are a couple of

other things that I will mention. Our government’s decision to build two new dams in Queensland hasgenerated much interest and debate, and so it should. It is a debate that is vital to all Queenslandersbecause hard decisions are needed to safeguard the future growth and development of our great state.There is no doubt that drought and climate change have severely affected our available water supplies.Climate change has made a very significant impact on what we need to do in terms of water planning. Ifwe do nothing, we will run out of water in the future—it is that simple. That is why my government isundertaking a comprehensive water action plan—the most detailed and far-reaching range of initiativesever undertaken in the history of this state.

We are addressing the issues of security and supply on a number of fronts. We are: securingwater for the environment and users through catchment based water resource plans, encouraging watertrading to provide access to water when supplies are limited, and protecting Queensland’s wild rivers forfuture generations; making smarter use of existing supplies by reducing water use, adopting waterconservation measures, reusing and recycling water; protecting water quality so our water is fit fordrinking and growing crops while protecting river catchments and the environment; introducingeducation and enforcement programs to make sure all users get a fair go, dams are safe, and theenvironment is protected; and investing in water and climate change science and technology so the rightdecisions are made about how much water can be used and the best methods are used to extract,share and reuse available supplies of water.

In addition, a key part of our planning for future water needs is the development of regional supplystrategies, drought management practices and, where appropriate, the building of new water storageand supply infrastructure. Here in south-east Queensland the government and councils are developinga region-wide water supply blueprint or water grid. With population projections suggesting the number ofpeople living in this region could grow by more than one million over the next two decades, it is clearthat, even with stringent water demand management measures, it will be necessary to provide largequantities of additional water. The growth figures for Queensland are at the higher end. I will have a littlemore to say about that this week. The number of people we are getting every week is higher than someever expected. We have to cope with that. This is our strategy.


That is why as part of the Queensland Future Growth Fund we have committed funds to helpaccelerate the building of two new dams in the region. Barring any major issues emerging of which weare unaware, Traveston will be the location for a new dam on the Mary River and by the end of nextmonth a decision will be made on either Tilley’s Bridge or Wyaralong on the Logan River catchment. Iknow that water is cheap politics but I urge all sides of politics to get on board with our plan to buildthese dams and build the infrastructure for the future. We can no longer manage water on a localbasis—we must consider the region as a whole.

Mr Livingstone: I bet the National Party do not support Gympie.Mr BEATTIE: They do not. That is why the south-east Queensland councils and our government

have agreed to work together in forming the new Water Commission which will lead to whole-of-regionsolutions including the construction of a water grid to service the whole region. An inevitable result ofthis new cooperative approach is that new dams and interconnecting pipelines will also need to be builtto service the whole region rather than just to meet the needs of local communities.

Over the years many dam sites have been identified throughout the region and various levels ofinvestigation have been conducted. However, the sites we have identified have been carefully analysedby the department of natural resources and have been identified for further assessment based on theircapacity to deliver very large quantities of reliable water, compared with other potential sites throughoutQueensland. We are now getting on with the job and have already started work to inform localcommunities affected by these decisions.

Officers of the department of natural resources met with Cooloola Shire Council representativesand members of the local community yesterday. They are meeting with Beaudesert Shire Council today.The consultation is continuing. In response to discussions with the Cooloola shire and community, thedepartment has agreed to provide support for counselling as well as an information centre landholdersare establishing at Kandanga. Letters have been sent to landholders potentially affected by both damsites. A Queensland water infrastructure hotline has also been established—the number is1800243585. Those landowners who are in the process or who intend to sell their property and areexperiencing hardship in doing so can register on the hotline. Yesterday, along with the minister fornatural resources, I announced an initial $50 million allocation for land acquisitions to assist thoselandowners.

We are addressing water supply needs through a broader strategy that includes better utilisingand conserving the water already in existing dams, cutting waste and excess use and investigating newtechnologies, including recycling and desalination. Home owners and businesses are also to beassisted to use less water and to capture their own supplies where possible including through the use ofrainwater tanks and water-saving devices being installed in homes.

However, the reality is that new dams are a necessary part of this broader strategy. Decisions ontheir location are not easy to make. No matter where we choose to locate a dam it will cause distressand heartache for the people who live and work in the vicinity. I do not like that any more than they do.There is nowhere that we can build a dam that everybody is going to be absolutely delighted about andat the same time is in an ideal catchment area.

If we are going to provide for Queensland’s future, we have to build these water infrastructures,and we will. I doubt there would be anyone in Queensland who would volunteer to have a dam in theirregion. However, a sign of any good government is a willingness not to run away from the toughdecisions, and we will not. We were elected to do a job and we are getting on with it.


Obesity SummitHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.49 pm), by leave: On 3 and 4 May 2006

I held an Obesity Summit in this chamber with some 90 stakeholders from the health, retail, variousindustry sectors and community representatives. Why? Because in Queensland there are approximately650,000 adults and 25,000 children aged five to 17 years who are obese or overweight, and thesenumbers are rising.

I table the Queensland Obesity Summit program, the Hansard transcript of proceedings, thedelegates’ information pack, the panel discussion, keynote speakers’ presentations and the summitoutcomes that I announced on 4 May. I hope that members will take the trouble to read them. In additionto tabling these documents, I also highlight the fact that we have announced a number of initiativestotalling $21 million over three years to combat this problem and we will be doing more. I seek leave tohave more details incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.Mr Speaker, medical experts warn that the present generation of Queensland children will be the first to die at a younger age thantheir parents because of the obesity epidemic.


Following last week’s Summit, I announced the first round of initiatives totalling some $21 million over 3 years to combat thisproblem. These represent a stride in the right direction to empowering more Queenslanders to adopt healthy eating and regularexercise. To oversee the implementation of the initiatives, I am convening a cross-departmental taskforce chaired by my Department. Itmeets for the first time next week. My taskforce will also review the many ideas and suggestions generated through the Summit, including 237 written submissions. Let me be frank. We are just beginning a major health fight that involves all sectors of our community, and every Queenslander. The Obesity Summit was an opportunity to roll up our sleeves and look honestly at the problem, and to forge ahead with solutions.Mr Speaker, I now table the Queensland Obesity Summit Program; the Hansard transcript of proceedings; the delegates’information pack; the panel discussions; keynote speakers’ presentations; and the Summit outcomes that I announced on May 4. Among the initiatives following the Summit are incentives aimed at businesses, government agencies, school children, and thewider community so they can access better information, services and facilities.Self-help was a strong theme at the Summit and we will be developing a Health Smart kit for householders, with fact sheets,guides and practical steps for maintaining lifelong health through better nutrition and exercise.It will be complemented by an overarching social marketing campaign, and there will also be a dedicated website.Partnerships were another area strongly advocated by experts at the Summit, and we are responding with a new $10 millionCommunity Partnership Grants Program for innovative programs in the community. In addition we are:• Opening up school sport and recreation grounds so more people can access this network of facilities;• Working with the Australian Medical Association (Queensland) to strengthen obesity education in school classrooms;• Investing in a state-of-the-art new cycle transit centre in partnership with the Brisbane City Council• Bringing in better food choices in Queensland Health facilities. Because employers have a role to play, we are establishing the Business Partnerships Awards to make workplaces healthier. I willalso be looking to Queensland Government agencies to make greater use of healthy lifestyle programs for the public sectorworkforce. Nationally, I also look forward to watching developments for better food labelling. I will also be pressing the Australian Governmentto look seriously at the issue of television advertising of unhealthy foods directed at children.


Queensland Future Growth FundHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.51 pm), by leave: Our government is

undertaking a major new initiative which will help provide building blocks to stimulate further investmentand growth in our great state. The Queensland Future Growth Fund will be financed from the sale ofSun Retail, comprising the retail business arm of Energex and the contestable elements of Ergon Retail.All details of the new fund will be released when the sale of the retail business has been concluded andthe final price determined over the next 12 months. However, we expect the funds raised to be in excessof $1 billion.

As a priority we have determined that $300 million will be allocated to support the continuedsustainable development of clean coal technology. Sufficient proceeds will also be reinvested ingovernment owned commercial infrastructure projects to ensure that the state suffers no net loss of theincome presently derived from the two assets.

Of course, our commitment to new water infrastructure is also a key part of the fund. As a prioritywe will allocate approximately $200 million to $300 million to help accelerate the building of two newdams and two new weir projects. I seek leave to have the details incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted. Subject to Commonwealth cooperation we now expect these projects to be completed by the end of 2011.Together they are expected to deliver up to an extra 235,000 megalitres per annum—this is equivalent to the approximate capacityof more than three new Hinze Dams.A dam on the Mary River catchment in the Gympie region is essential for the south east corner of our State—especially theCooloola region as well as the burgeoning Sunshine Coast.Traveston has been identified by the Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Water as a promising site for the dam throughits work developing the South East Queensland Regional Water Supply Strategy.We need to complete final technical assessments of this site but, barring any major issues emerging of which we are unaware,Traveston will be the location for this new dam.This site could potentially provide an additional 100,000 megalitres of water each year to boost Queensland’s water supplysystem. Its storage capacity is projected at 660,000 megalitres—more than double the capacity of the 300,000-megalitre Paradise Damcommissioned by the our Government on the Burnett River near Bundaberg late last year.Mr Speaker, we will also bring forward the construction of the promised new dam proposed for the upper reaches of the LoganRiver.As part of this process we will re-examine the existing proposal for the Wyaralong Dam site as compared to a new site which hasbeen identified at Tilleys Bridge near Rathdowney. A detailed investigation, including geotechnical works will be carried out to determine which site will deliver the best yield.On the Fitzroy River in Central Queensland we will raise the Eden Bann weir and build a new weir at Rookwood.


These two projects alone are expected to deliver up to 86,000 megalitres per annum for future growth in Rockhampton, Yeppoonand Gladstone.Mr Speaker,This week we will introduce legislation into Parliament to create the Queensland Future Growth Fund.It is a vital and visionary initiative that will ensure Queensland remains a step ahead in:• New technologies to mitigate climate changes effects, particularly clean coal technology;• New water infrastructure to help Queensland deal with the effects of climate change; and• New infrastructure to promote Queensland’s continued strong economic development.


Rolleston Coalmine Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.52 pm), by leave: On 27 April I visited

the Bowen region to open Xstrata’s $540 million Rolleston coalmine. I seek leave to have the detailsincorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted. The open cut thermal coal mine is Xstrata’s first Greenfield development. It will provide 150 new long-term jobs and annualroyalties to Queensland in the order of $20 million.

This venture is good news for jobs, for export earnings, and for development of infrastructure.

Along with bringing an upgraded and more secure power supply to the region, $250 million of Xstrata’s investment has gone intothe 110 kilometre Gladstone rail link which will be a multi-user service—not just restricted to the movement of coal.

I congratulate Xstrata on its important participation in so many aspects of the Basin’s community, particularly the spending of$1.8 million over 3 years to, with the local council, improve infrastructure and services to the region.

During the 2005 calendar year, Queensland’s coal exports rose to a record 144 million tonnes—an increase of 3.5% on 2004’sfigure, which was itself a record. By 2010, we expect Queensland coal exports to exceed 200 million tonnes a year.

Rolleston, which is building up to its initial maximum export capacity of 6 million tonnes per annum, with the potential to doublethat figure, will be a major contributor to that increase.

The coal industry has been a strong source of employment growth in Queensland since my Government took office in 1998, when8,961 jobs existed in this sector.

By the end of 2005 that figure jumped to 16,783 direct jobs and, as the industry expands, that will continue to rise.

I thank Xstrata for its participation in forming a joint venture to establish an Oxy-fuel demonstration project to investigate clean fueltechnology.

Success in producing clean coal technology will ensure Queensland has a market for its coal for many decades to come.


Brisbane Festival

Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.52 pm), by leave: I am honoured to becohosting a major international forum with former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev during the BrisbaneFestival in July. The Brisbane Festival this year brings together global decision makers and NobelLaureates in Peace to discuss important challenges facing the world today. I seek leave to have thedetails incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.Called Earth Dialogues Brisbane 2006: A World Forum for Resource Management and Sustainable Development, it is evidence ofjust how the Brisbane Festival has evolved since its inception in 1996.

In fact the program goes so far as to challenge the notion of what a festival is, offering the public a diversity of events not only toentertain but also to engage and educate.

It is a major coup to have people the calibre of Mikhail Gorbachev and other Nobel Laureates in Peace taking part.

Earth Dialogues is on from 21-24 July, and the public can attend free forums on 22 and 23 July.

Thousands of students across Queensland will also have the opportunity to join Earth Dialogues through an extensive educationprogram which encourages them to develop programs and debate environmental issues.

Without doubt, this year’s Brisbane Festival is the most extensive in the event’s 10-year history, featuring more than 350performances in 17 days.

Besides being a showpiece on our cultural calendar, the Festival provides employment opportunities for our local artists.

The Brisbane Festival 2006 runs from 14-30 July. The Earth Dialogues Brisbane 2006 forum takes place from 21-24 July.



Beef Australia 2006; Virgin Blue

Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.53 pm), by leave: As the Leader of theHouse, Robert Schwarten, will tell members, I was delighted to be in Rockhampton last week towelcome over 500 international delegates to Australia’s beef capital for Beef 2006. I want to thank PaulHoolihan, who was there as part of the event. Jim Pearce the member for Fitzroy, Paul Hoolihan themember for Keppel, Robert Schwarten and I agree that it was a great thing not just for Rockhampton butalso for Queensland. We were also there to welcome the first direct flight of Virgin Blue from Sydney toRockhampton. I seek leave to incorporate the details in Hansard.

Leave granted.The national expo was one of the largest beef cattle events in the world, with representatives from major international producing,exporting and importing countries including Brazil, Argentina, the US, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Africa and Europe.

It was the biggest ever gathering of cattle producers, breeders and processors joining beef lovers to take advantage of valuabletrade, networking and new business opportunities.

Beef is big business for Queensland.

Smart State beef exports make up more than 60% of the national figure and generate more than $3.2 billion a year for our state.

Queensland also holds just under half of Australia’s 23 million head of cattle, with 11 million head here in Queensland.

And this hasn’t happened by accident. We have long recognised the need to innovate, and to equal if not exceed world’s bestpractice to maintain our export markets, particularly at a time when international competition is more intense than ever.

Queensland is a world-leader in tropical and sub-tropical beef research, undertaking a range of research and developmentprojects in partnership with industry partners and through 12 major research centres across Queensland.

While we are determined to maintain our international competitiveness, Beef 2006 was about sharing expertise and exchangingideas with other major exporters from around the world to mutually improve and enhance our products.

I was also pleased to welcome Virgin Blue’s first direct flight from Sydney while in Rockhampton.

The airline now flies the only direct Sydney/Rockhampton route three times a week.

This is a great extension of Virgin Blue’s commitment to boosting regional services in Queensland and I congratulate them on theirdecision.

Virgin Blue has become an integral member of Queensland’s vibrant and fast growing aviation industry, and are no doubt happywith their decision to call the Smart State home.


Premier’s Export Awards

Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.53 pm), by leave: I was pleased tolaunch the 17th annual Premier of Queensland’s Export Awards here last Friday. I encouragenominations and I seek leave to have the details incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.The search is now on for Queensland’s most innovative and successful exporters that make such an important contribution to oureconomy.

Last year merchandise exports injected $26.3 billion into the Smart State economy, equating to one in five jobs state-wide andrising to one in four in the regions.

These awards are about recognising and promoting the success of Queensland’s smartest exporters and demonstrating to otherQueensland businesses what can be achieved through innovation and export opportunities.

The awards call for nominations in 12 categories including a new category this year for Small to Micro Businesses.

We recognise that some of the biggest exporters have to start out small and we want to encourage Small to Micro Businesses.

The Queensland Exporter of the Year will be chosen from the winners of each category, and all entrants will be eligible for theDermot McManus Export Award for distinguished export performance.

This is a great opportunity for Queensland businesses exporting their products to the world to stand up and be acknowledged fortheir valuable contribution to the State,” he said.

Winners will be announced at a gala dinner on October 12 and will be eligible for the Australian Exporter of the Year Awardspresented later this year.

For more information visit www.exportawards.qld.gov.au or call 3224 6631.



EthanolHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.53 pm), by leave: Prior to the lunch with

the Governor of Washington I had the pleasure of opening a conference on ethanol. At last year’sconference I released the $7.3 million Queensland Ethanol Industry Action Plan 2005-07 to encouragethe expansion of the ethanol industry. To date, $1.4 million has already been committed and a$2.28 million education campaign will be launched tomorrow by the Deputy Premier. The campaign willassist Queensland motorists to better understand the benefits of using renewable ethanol fuels.

A year ago, 49 service stations were selling ethanol blended fuels in Queensland. Now there are131. We are making significant progress. A $54 million biorefinery in Dalby will begin construction nextyear.

We are now seeing an unprecedented opportunity for ethanol. I mention that because, with theincreased price of oil, we are now finding that ethanol is competitive. We need to make sure that weexpand the ethanol industry not only in Queensland but also in Australia. We have to try to get thefederal government to work with us to get an export industry into markets such as Japan and China.

It was interesting to see Japanese and Chinese delegates at this conference. They understandthe benefits of renewable energy. We have to start thinking about sugar as a fuel source, not just as afood source. The same thing applies to sorghum and other grains.

In addition, the environmental outcomes from ethanol are very significant. So not only is ethanol acost issue—and price will determine these things; the other important issue to note is that ethanolblended fuels are good for the environment. I seek leave to have the details incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted. The Queensland Government has a vision for the cleaner, greener fuel of the future.The ethanol industry is an emerging one but the challenge now is to capitalise on what's already been achieved in a relativelyshort time and instil confidence in motorists, get more fuel companies on board and get the automotive industry to also instilconfidence in motorists. Most cares off the production line after 1986 are compatible.Queensland is clearly leading the nation in ethanol industry development since the introduction of the $7.3 million QueenslandEthanol Industry Action Plan 2005-07.$4.8 million of this money is for the Conversion Initiative to help fuel groups convert their stations to E10 blends. So far, $1.4million has gone to groups such as Neumann's Petroleum and the United Fuel Group to assist conversion of 76 service stations inQueensland.The number E10 stations in Queensland has grown from around 40 just 18 months ago to the current 131 and there are another30 in the pipeline.The BP blending facility is now operational in Mackay and the Dalby Biorefinery - a private enterprise - is due to start constructionthis year, meaning jobs, jobs, jobs for that region.Economically, ethanol gives a whole new potential for our sugar and grain crops hit hard by drought and the downturn in worldprices for agricultural commodities.Environmentally, ethanol also offers us new opportunities because it is renewable - it's produced from crops which can beharvested then grown again.The AMA says ethanol blend fuels reduce harmful tail pipe emissions resulting in cleaner air, as does the Lung Foundation.Petrol prices will not be cheaper in the short term but who knows in the long term because ethanol reduces our reliance on fossilfuels as world oil prices skyrocket.Q fleet encourages all drivers to use ethanol where possible and we have an agreement in place with nine suppliers across thestate.Q Fleet is leading by example.Q Fleet drivers use over 200,000 litres of E10 a month and supplies E10 fuels at its South Brisbane Service Centre.Q Fleet currently leases 209 Toyota Prius petrol/electric hybrid vehicles. This is the largest individual Prius fleet in Australia. Afurther 35 new Prius vehicles are on order, some of which will replace conventional, internal combustion vehicles.


Directors-General, RemunerationHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier) (2.55 pm), by leave: My government holds

our top public servants to the highest standards of accountability. As the CEOs of government agencies,Queensland’s directors-general are expected to deliver services and programs across the state. Thiscan be a difficult task which requires highly skilled and talented executives with an ability to balancecompeting priorities and manage large organisations.

The market for executives with these skill sets is highly competitive, with private and public sectoragencies outbidding each other to attract good-quality candidates. Queensland’s CEOs are well

09 May 2006 Water Amendment Bill 1489

remunerated but, in comparison with other states, the salaries offered by the Queensland government toCEOs are low. Currently, the total remuneration for Queensland directors-general is well behind those inother states, especially those in New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia. We are losing peopleto the private sector and interstate.

In order to attract the best and the brightest to Queensland, I have asked the Public ServiceCommissioner to review the salaries being paid to our directors-general. He has given me certain adviceand I have also looked at the matter myself. The Public Service Commissioner responded with a revisedmodel for CEO remuneration. I have divided the bands into six separate bands. In the interests ofopenness and transparency, I will go through these bands. They will begin to apply as existing contractsexpire. Remuneration could then be reassessed against the new bands. No CEO will receive a pay risewhile on current contract.

Basically, I am releasing the bands and then I could make a determination when contracts comeup as to whether people will get a pay rise or whether they will just fit into the bands. All I am doing todayis releasing the new bands. Whether anyone ever fits into them will depend on how good they are andwill depend on whether I negotiate. The top four bands will be CEO1, $420,000 to $470,000; CEO2,$370,000 to $420,000; CEO3 $320,000 to $370,000; and CEO4, $270,00 to $320,000. These are thetotal packages.

I want to make the point that, compared to interstate, we are lagging behind. I want to keep thelatitude to be able to deal with these, if necessary. As I said, no-one is getting a pay rise out of this. I amjust looking forward to the future. I think we need to have transparency about the bands. I seek leave toincorporate details in Hansard.

Leave granted. He has responded with a revised model for CEO remuneration divided into six separate bands:

All bands for total remuneration including superannuation; leave loading and vehicle costs.

WATER AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Resumed from 21 April (see p. 1382). Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (2.58 pm): I am pleased to make

a contribution to the consideration of the Water Amendment Bill 2006. This bill amends the Water Act tocreate the Queensland Water Commission. The explanatory notes that accompany this bill give creditfor the genesis of this idea to the South East Queensland Regional Plan. The Queensland WaterCommission that is set up by this bill before the House has been touted as a comprehensive waterresource planning framework. In reality, it is part of the government’s perception-building exercise—acontinuation of which we have just heard in the ministerial statement that the Premier made. It is aperception-building exercise that is designed to build the perception in south-east Queensland that thisgovernment is doing something about what is rapidly becoming evident as its latest and greatest failureand that is the failure to do anything about providing water infrastructure in south-east Queensland forthe past eight years.

Despite the constant warnings, despite the constant pressure from the opposition here in theparliament, despite the constant lobbying by all the stakeholders who have warned for years that thereneeds to be a massive investment in water infrastructure to meet the rapidly growing water demands ofsouth-east Queensland, the Beattie Labor government has done nothing for eight years. It has donenothing to deliver water infrastructure to meet that obvious and growing need. It is now faced with awater crisis that has certainly been brought home to the people who live in south-east Queensland asthey face rapidly escalating water restrictions. It is not the first crisis that the Beattie Labor governmenthas faced, and it is not the first crisis that is of its own making.

BAND CLASSIFICATION BAND WIDTH

CEO1 $420,000—$470,000

CEO2 $370,000—$420,000

CEO3 $320,000—$370,000

CEO4 $270,000—$320,000

CEO5 $220,000—$270,000

CEO6 $190,000—$220,000

1490 Water Amendment Bill 09 May 2006

This crisis that the government and the people of Queensland now face is similar to the crisis inthe area of health and hospitals, the crisis with regard to electricity and the crisis that emerged in thechild safety department. In all of those situations the crises were brought about by the government’sinaction, by its refusal to see and understand what was happening and to take the action necessary toavoid the crisis developing. In all of those situations the crises were brought about by a complete failureto plan for the future, a complete failure to act before it becomes a crisis management situation. That isexactly the same situation that we have now in relation to the water supplies in south-east Queensland.

What we badly need in south-east Queensland—and everybody realises this; even thegovernment belatedly realises this—is some action, which is overdue. We need some action; we do notneed more planning. We need some action to provide that badly needed water resource infrastructure.The government knows that and the people of south-east Queensland certainly know that. Over the lastfew weeks the government has embarked on a huge perception-building exercise. The bill before theHouse, which has been rushed into the parliament today—and I will say more about the way it wasrushed in later—is part of this perception-building exercise. The fact that we are debating this legislationtoday has more to do with building perceptions than it has to do with building water infrastructure. Thatis the reality.

We certainly do not oppose the concept of a Queensland Water Commission, but I certainly donot agree with the way the spin doctors have tried to sell this concept as some sort of solution to south-east Queensland’s water crisis. The government is now in panic mode. This is part of its panic responsethat we have seen across a range of areas. The ministerial statement the Premier has just made is alsopart of that panic response.

The two dams that the Premier spoke about—the one at Traveston and the one at Rathdowney,which were the subject of questions this morning—are all part of that perception-building exercise. Asthe Leader of the Opposition said in the House this morning, the Premier and the government haveabsolutely no intention of building either of those dams; it is about building the perception that they aredoing something. As is evident in the documents that I tabled this morning in a question without notice,a whole range of options for water infrastructure in south-east Queensland have been identified inplanning processes that have been going on now for 10 or 12 years. Not one of those planning reportsmentioned either of the options that have suddenly become the government’s preferred options.

So it is a valid question to ask: why has the government chosen these two options? Why has itchosen the dam on the Mary River at Traveston and the dam at Rathdowney as its preferred optionswhen neither of those projects were listed as options in any of the reports and studies that have beendone over the last 10 years? The answer is that the government has chosen projects that it knowscannot be delivered, but those projects build the perception in the community that the government istrying to do something.

The accusation was made this morning that the coalition somehow does not support the buildingof water infrastructure. How absurd is that, given the number of times I have stood in this parliament andraised this issue and pressured a succession of natural resources ministers to get on with the job andbuild something! In a fit of absurdity, those opposite come in here and make the accusation that we donot support the building of water infrastructure. Let me put on the record again for the umpteenth timethat we urge the government to get on with it and build water infrastructure that can be delivered—buildthe projects for which the government has been acquiring land for 10 or 12 years and which wereidentified in those planning studies that I tabled this morning. The government should stopprocrastinating and playing these stupid political games.

I urge the government to get on with it and build the infrastructure, which is the core responsibilityof any state government, to ensure that south-east Queensland has a reliable water supply. Theprojects identified in those planning documents can begin now because all of the work has been done. Ahuge amount of work has been done on the options that are listed in those planning documents. Incontrast, absolutely nothing has been done on the two projects that the government has identified as itspreferred options. Nothing has been done with regard to the Traveston project and nothing has beendone with regard to the Rathdowney project. Yet the government has identified them as its preferredoptions. I urge the government to get on with it and build the options that can be delivered and deliveredquickly.

If the government were to complete those projects and if it were to implement the othersuggestions the opposition has put forward in this parliament for years with regard to water efficiencyinitiatives, then we would not be facing the water crisis that we have in south-east Queensland at themoment. If the government were to put economic drivers in place to ensure that water is used efficiently,adopt our suggestions about water recycling, embrace our vision to end the discharge of treated waterinto our bays and rivers completely—the vision that I and the member for Burnett have put forward—andmake use of recycled water, as well as complete the projects identified in the planning and studies thathave been undertaken in the last 10 years, then we would not be facing the water crisis that we have insouth-east Queensland at the moment, and we would not be seeing this stupid political game beingplayed that is more about trying to save the Premier’s political hide than it is about delivering real waterinfrastructure for south-east Queensland.


That is the difference between this side of the parliament and that side of the parliament. Thisside of the parliament is more interested in delivering something real for the people of south-eastQueensland. That side of the parliament is all about building perceptions, all about spinning the issue,all about creating a false impression to ensure that they get re-elected at the next election. In the weeksand months ahead, I will certainly be determined to expose just how false, misleading and cruel thepropositions put forward by the current minister and the Premier are. They know that they cannot deliverand that is the very reason those projects have been chosen. They have been chosen for those politicalreasons.

In the House this morning, the minister could not give an indication of any process whichidentified those projects as a preferred option. He had absolutely no evidence to support the selection ofthose projects as the preferred option—absolutely none. The minister had an opportunity this morning,and he will have another opportunity at the conclusion of this debate, to put on the public record theevidence that supports that contention.

There is no logic, no reason and no science behind the government’s choice of those two projectsas preferred projects to solve the water crisis. There is no logic, no reason and no science behind thegovernment’s abandonment of other projects, which have been researched and studied for the last 10or 12 years and for which the government has already acquired a significant amount of land. In somecases, the majority of the land that is required for those projects has already been acquired by thegovernment.

However, the government has opted for a project, in the case of the Mary Valley at Traveston, thatwill be, I believe, the greatest land acquisition challenge ever attempted in this state. If one goes to theMary Valley and stands at that proposed dam site, it is obvious, in terms of the land that will have to berepossessed, that it is the worst dam site in Queensland in terms of social disruption. It is the worst damsite in Queensland in terms of the expense that will be incurred to properly compensate the people wholive in that very fertile and very productive valley from Traveston, north to Kandanga. I have no doubtthat in the fullness of time, after a couple of months, it will be brought home to the government that thatis the obvious fact of the matter. However, by then, I believe that its strategy—the perception-buildingexercise that it is attempting, of which this bill is a part—will have served the political purpose that it hasidentified for it.

The creation of a Queensland Water Commission, as with the announcement of the two dams,came as a complete surprise to stakeholders. I well remember the morning that it was announced here.There were not even enough copies of the legislation for the attendants to hand out to MPs. Localgovernment stakeholders were summoned here for some sort of shock announcement to facilitate or tofit in with the government’s public relations exercise. In that respect, it, too, is very much panic politicsand planning by press release. It is the same approach. It is all about trying desperately to create theperception that the government is doing something. We have seen it carried through in the last couple ofweeks, as the communities that have been shell-shocked by the dam announcements have tried torespond. We have seen the Premier making up responses on the spur of the moment. We have seenthe minister making up responses on the spur of the moment.

This is not the way that major infrastructure should be delivered and this is not the way that majornatural resource administration decisions should be taken, yet this is the position that the governmenthas come to. The administration of natural resources such as water—one of our most critical naturalresources—should be done in a carefully planned and carefully reasoned way. The delivery of the typeof infrastructure that is associated with the provision of adequate water supplies should be a carefullyplanned and carefully reasoned process that happens over a period of time in close consultation notonly with stakeholders, water providers and councils, but also with the communities and the people whoare involved. None of that has happened in this case. It has not happened in regard to the QueenslandWater Commission, which this bill introduces and sets up, and it has not happened in regard to thewater infrastructure that the government has announced. In that regard, it illustrates quite clearly thefailure of this Beattie Labor government.

The bill before the House sets up a three-person commission with an advisory role to thegovernment and with limited powers of direction over water providers, such as local governments. I wasinterested to read in the explanatory notes that the change to the planning mechanism or the planningprocess is only part of a ‘package of reforms’ that the government has embarked upon, following theSEQ regional planning process. That package of reforms is listed in the explanatory notes, firstly, as‘planning for water security’, which this Water Commission has been given responsibility for; secondly,‘water sharing and entitlements’; thirdly, ‘cost sharing, pricing and economic regulation’; and, fourthly,‘asset ownership and integration’. The explanatory notes go on to state—Because these four elements are related, work on each is being progressed simultaneously. However, priority needs to be given tofixing the planning model.‘Fixing the planning model’. I wonder what evidence the minister can present that the planning model,so-called, is somehow broken. The explanatory notes go on to state—There are a number of problems with the current planning model, including the fact that there is no entity that is clearly responsiblefor ensuring regional water supply security.


I would have thought—and I think that most Queenslanders would have thought—that that wasthe responsibility of the minister and his department. That was the responsibility of the minister and thedepartment of natural resources. If one tried to define the responsibility of the minister and hisdepartment, then certainly regional water supply security would be high amongst the reasons offered forthe existence of that department. It almost indicates that the Water Commission to be set up by this billis somehow in response to a failure of the department of natural resources to carry out one of its coreroles. That is reinforced if one reads further in the explanatory notes, where it states, ‘The Commissionwill have four main roles’. The first three of them, without doubt, are traditional roles of the department ofnatural resources. It states—The Commission will have four main roles. Undertake regional assessments of options for water supply sources and demandmanagement measures, from which it will develop water security options. The options will address supply options and demandmanagement measures and will be forwarded to the minister to consider when making a regional water security program.

So, the commission will undertake regional assessments and provide advice to the minister. Isthat not what the department has done? Is the minister seriously suggesting that the department ofnatural resources does not have the capacity to do that, or did not have the capacity to do that before itwas gutted by this government and turned into some sort of a quasi police force? That role has certainlybeen a traditional role of the department of natural resources.

The second dot point states that the new commission will ‘facilitate and implement regional watersecurity programs approved and published by the minister’. When you ask yourself what it means tofacilitate and implement regional water security programs that have been approved by the minister,basically, you would distil it down to say that it would be implementing government policy in regard towater security and regional water security programs. That, too, is a core role of the department ofnatural resources, to implement and facilitate government policy.

The third dot point states that it will ‘ensure relevant parties comply with a regional water securityprogram approved and published by the minister’. I do not think anybody doubts that the department ofnatural resources has been given an increased role in ensuring that relevant parties comply.

Over the last couple of years the focus of the department has been to ensure that relevant partiescomply with a whole range of legislation. I have spoken about that, as have numerous members on thisside of the House. The last dot point states that it will ‘set restrictions on usage in circumstances wherethe Commission considers it necessary in the interests of ensuring security of water supply’.

That gives the commission the power to set water restrictions across a regional area. That is anew power, but it is about the only new power that the commission has. If members go back to what Iwas talking about before in relation to the way that this commission has been built up and sold by thespin doctors as some sort of a solution to south-east Queensland’s water supply and look at the realityof what the commission has actually been given to do, there is a stark difference. In reality the only newpower is to set across-the-board water restrictions.

It is interesting to look at some of the reporting that took place to reinforce that when thecommission was first announced. An article in the Courier-Mail on Friday, 10 March, which I have nodoubt is a result of information that has been pushed by the government’s spin doctors, states—The state has taken control of water planning in south-east Queensland with a statutory commission to establish uniform waterrestrictions across 18 councils.

The second part of that statement is correct, of course, that it now has the power to establishuniform water restrictions. But how on earth does this commission allow the state to take control ofwater planning in south-east Queensland? It is a huge exaggeration. It is part of that perception-buildingexercise. In reality the only thing that the commission can do is to provide advice to the minister andthen to facilitate and assist in implementing his decision—the same roles that have traditionally beenperformed by the department of natural resources and are now going to be performed by this arm’s-length commission.

There is a whole range of reporting along the same lines. The Australian Financial Review, nodoubt once again at the behest of government media minders, published this article—The Beattie Government has established a central body to control water assets and long-term planning in south-east Queensland.The Courier-Mail on Friday the 21st says the Beattie Government will take over responsibility from the councils for water planningand for setting water restrictions under sweeping changes to be announced to parliament today.

It is all about building the perception that somehow this is a powerful new body that is going tosolve a problem that is a direct result of the government’s inaction over eight or 10 years; a problem thatis a direct result of a series of incompetent ministers who have not been prepared to take the harddecisions, who have not been prepared to go in to bat in the cabinet budget process to ensure that therewas money available for this type of infrastructure.

The reality is that when members look at this legislation this commission will not create one extralitre of water for the residents of south-east Queensland facing tough water restrictions; it will not delayfor one day the imposition of level 4 or level 5 water restrictions; it will not alleviate the burden of thosewater restrictions on the people of south-east Queensland. The people of south-east Queensland canbe absolutely sure in their own minds that the responsibility for that rests with the Beattie Labor


government. Irrespective of how this Water Commission is sold, irrespective of how it is built up andirrespective of how the spin doctors like to package it and sell it as some sort of a solution and some sortof a body that is going to be responsible, responsibility for the water crisis that we currently endure andthat is going to get worse rests wholly and solely with the Beattie Labor government and with a series ofministers who have failed in their core duty.

The commission will not in itself ensure that any new infrastructure is built. This commission hasan advisory role to the minister, not a decision-making role. This commission has a role advising thegovernment to do what it knows it should have been doing for the last eight years. The governmentshould not need advice as to what it has been doing. It is not the lack of a Water Commission that hasled to the lack of investment in water infrastructure in south-east Queensland for the entire term of theBeattie government. The reason investment has not taken place is not that we did not have a WaterCommission so therefore we could not make the investments. It is not the lack of a Water Commissionthat has led to the lack of water and the current water crisis being faced by the people of south-eastQueensland. That lack of investment and the resultant water crisis was brought about by a lack of actionand a lack of investment by Peter Beattie and his succession of failed ministers for natural resourcesover the last eight years.

Unless there is a change of attitude across the government and unless there is a change ofattitude more particularly with whoever occupies the seat of the minister for natural resources, thesetting up of this Water Commission will do nothing to resolve the crisis and will do nothing to ensurethat this sort of crisis is not repeated. There has to be that change of attitude. There has to be anacceptance of the arguments that we have put forward in this parliament over a number of years now.We have been ridiculed for them but we have continued to put them forward. There has to be anacceptance that those arguments are valid. A core responsibility of the state government is to invest inwater infrastructure and to provide water infrastructure ahead of need so that we do not have a crisismanagement approach to the provision of this essential infrastructure.

However, I believe and I fear that there has not been the required change of attitude in thegovernment. This Water Commission is about building perceptions; it is not about building anything inreality. The rush to set up this Water Commission was part of that perception-building exercise. It wastypical of the management style that has become so much a feature of the Beattie government. The billhas been driven by a political need to appear to be responding to the water crisis that is fast becomingso much of a reality. The legislation that we debate today is acknowledgement that the Beattie Laborgovernment has been asleep at the wheel for the past eight years and has failed to plan properly tosustain south-east Queensland’s massive population growth.

Now we have an attempt in the parliament today to belatedly shift responsibility for planning awayfrom the state government and say that if we set up this Water Commission we will have a body that cando the required planning and can ensure that planning for that infrastructure is done in an appropriateway. This bill and all the spin that has gone into its introduction and fast-tracking into the parliament is anattempt to build that perception and to build the perception that from here on we will have a responsibleentity to do the planning that the government has failed to do. That will very much be a perception and aperception only, because the commission has only an advisory role. Any improvement relies on achange of attitude across the government for any real changes to be made in the provision of waterinfrastructure in south-east Queensland.

Anyone who doubts that should read the bill. Do not listen to the spin doctors. Read the bill andcompare it with what is heard from the spin doctors and the minister’s press releases. Any close readingof the bill will indicate that the responsibility and the decision-making power for water infrastructure insouth-east Queensland will still rest with the government and the minister, exactly as it has up until now.The responsibility will rest with the government—the same government and the same minister who havefailed up until now to properly exercise that responsibility. The Water Commission will change nothing inthat regard. The bill clearly sets out that the commission can only advise the minister. The minister canreject that advice, just as he has rejected all such advice to date from a range of stakeholders in thewater supply industry and the opposition in this House.

In recent weeks the Beattie Labor government seems to have finally woken up to the fact that wehave a water crisis and some of its actions in response to that belated realisation have been nothingshort of political panic. First we had the Premier announcing a water audit program without consultingthe councils who are expected to share in the costs and deliver the program. Then funding was finallycommitted towards the construction of a recycled waste water pipeline, something that we have beentalking about for years in this House.

This funding came only after the coalition had committed to provide at least $100 million towardsproposals to pipe Brisbane’s waste water west prior to the last three elections—and it is still only talk.Even after eight years nothing concrete has been done to reverse the flow of recycled water intoMoreton Bay and Brisbane River. Nothing concrete has yet been done by the minister or by the currentBeattie government to reverse that huge flow of recyclable water that could be put to such a range ofuses.


The government then stunned almost everybody in the water industry by resurrecting two damproposals that have not been on the radar for more than a decade. They have not been heard of for 12years! The government identified them as its preferred options, with absolutely no supporting evidence.There was no basis presented for the declaration of those projects as its preferred options, and in sodoing the government rejected all of the proposals that have been worked on over that planning periodand for which the government has acquired considerable areas of land. After doing nothing for eightyears to ensure that our water supplies are adequate and reliable, the Premier now maintains that hisgovernment will do all the planning work, all the consultations, all the EISs and all the consultations withlandholders on these two new dams within six weeks. Then he has the absurd notion that somehow heis going to start construction this year, within six months.

It is an absurd notion to suggest that major water infrastructure should be delivered in such a way.It is in marked contrast to what ministers in the Beattie Labor government have had to say about damsin the past. On 18 June the former natural resources minister, Stephen Robertson, issued a mediastatement claiming—Mr Springborg wants to build dams on a political whim and leave the community and the environment to pay the price.

The minister went on to say that ‘there is no sense building expensive dams’ and that buildingdams was ‘1950s dinosaur thinking’. Then on 17 January, just over a year ago, Mr Robertson onceagain issued a media statement headed ‘Springborg’s dam approach doesn’t hold water’. This antidamapproach is coming from a man who is still a key figure in the cabinet and who no doubt still holds thoseviews.

Mr Robertson was not the only minister who said that Queensland does not need dams. As theLeader of the Opposition illustrated this morning in question time, on 25 February 2005 the Fraser CoastChronicle reported that the environment and local government minister, Desley Boyle, told anInternational Water Loss Task Force—... dams are a bloke’s thing. All these blokes keep ringing me up and saying they want dams. They want big dams. I keep tellingthem it’s about managing what we have got properly.

Mr Hopper: Big dams! Mr SEENEY: Big dams! It must have been an extremely interesting cabinet meeting when the

Premier came in and told his puppets in cabinet that his proposal was to promote the construction of ‘bigdams’ and that he had decided Labor would have to abandon its antidam rhetoric. The government wasnow going to go out and tell the people of south-east Queensland that it was going to build dams thatwould require resumptions of hundreds of properties in the Mary Valley and at Rathdowney and thatwould cost billions of dollars to build.

It would be interesting to hear the views of Minister Robertson and Minister Boyle in this debate.No doubt we will not have the opportunity in this parliament to hear the views of Minister Robertson andMinister Boyle, and we will not have the opportunity to hear them recant the views that they expressedin criticising the opposition for trying to highlight this issue over such a long period of time. Theycriticised the opposition for trying to highlight the need for the government to progress the provision ofwater infrastructure projects in south-east Queensland to avoid the crisis that they now find themselvesin.

This is no way to manage one of the core responsibilities of the state government. Just like thecrisis gripping our state hospitals, the water crisis is one of the government’s own making. Just like thehealth crisis, the government’s response is one of panic designed first and foremost to save its ownpolitical life. The fact that this legislation is being debated today is further evidence of the panic that isgripping the government, because it has been brought forward on the list, far beyond what normallywould happen. This legislation was introduced at such a rush at the last sitting, as I said before, thatcouncils were consulted only on the morning of its introduction and there were barely enough copies ofthe bill printed for MPs. We could not even get a copy of it.

I understand that the South East Queensland Council of Mayors and the Local GovernmentAssociation of Queensland were told to get their comments in within a fortnight so that this debate couldstart today. Rush it through; give the perception that the government is urgently moving to address thecrisis that the government itself has created, when in fact if we ignore the spin and look at the detail itbecomes evident that the formation of this commission will do nothing to address the immediacy of thatproblem.

The South East Queensland Council of Mayors and the Local Government Association ofQueensland have subsequently provided a two-page letter and a five-page submission with commentsand suggested changes to the bill. I have been provided with copies of those submissions, and I thankboth those bodies for providing me with their views. Whether the Beattie Labor government will adoptthe suggestions that the South East Queensland Council of Mayors and the LGAQ have made in theirsubmissions is still unclear. However, I would hope that given the short period of consultation and therushed nature of the introduction of this legislation we will see from the minister a range of amendmentsthat will seek to address the concerns that have been made in good faith by these major stakeholders.


Once again, this is no way to manage one of our most essential services and one ofQueensland’s most precious natural resources. Quite simply, without water none of us can survive. Thesustainable management of our underground and surface water resources is critical to the welfare of allQueenslanders. As well as supporting life itself and the health of the environment, water underpinssocial and economic development across the state. Right across the state our dams are running dry,and water restrictions are in force. Major dams in the rapidly growing south-east could run out of waterby September 2008, while north Queensland faces major water shortage problems by 2015 and south-west Queensland by 2016. In these areas and other parts of the state a lack of water planning isimpacting on the lifestyles of local residents and is limiting economic growth, particularly forQueensland’s mining and agricultural industries. In central Queensland the mining industry, which hassuch potential to contribute to the wellbeing of every Queenslander, is being curtailed through a lack ofavailable water supplies. That is a direct result of the lack of a provision of water infrastructure. Make nomistake about it: the water crisis that they face, as the people of south-east Queensland face, is a directresult of Labor’s failure to invest in Queensland’s future water needs.

The crisis that we face today has its origins in the Goss Labor government’s decision to scrap theWolffdene Dam planned for south-east Queensland in 1989 and a continuation of that attitude that sawthe scrapping of that dam. For the past 16 years Labor governments have produced report after reportafter report but have not built anything since they scrapped the Wolffdene Dam. It was a major turningpoint. It was a major attitudinal turning point in the administration of water resources in south-eastQueensland. The irony is that the current minister for natural resources had a major role in the changeof attitude that saw the Wolffdene Dam scrapped—

Mr Palaszczuk: A humble backbencher!Mr SEENEY:—and has seen that same attitude entrenched in a government that has done

absolutely nothing since. Mr Palaszczuk: A powerful National Party government; a humble opposition backbencher. Dear

me! Mr SEENEY: No matter how much the minister protests, he can never get away from the fact that

he was a major player in entrenching this attitude in the administration of water infrastructure inQueensland which has led directly to the crisis today which had its genesis in the scrapping of theWolffdene Dam back in 1989.

The coalition has been warning for years that the Beattie Labor government’s failure to invest inwater infrastructure to cater for population growth would lead to water shortages throughoutQueensland. Indeed, the need for more water infrastructure was one of the main themes of theopposition leader’s 2004 budget reply speech. Yet we saw the absurd dishonesty in this parliament thismorning of the Premier accusing us of being opposed to the construction of water infrastructure—theabsurd dishonesty, given the record that we have for promoting the construction of water infrastructureand pressuring the government. It was the main theme of the opposition leader’s budget reply speech in2004. Yet the level of dishonesty in the government is such that its members can come into this Houseand accuse us of being opposed to the construction of water infrastructure.

What we are opposed to is turning this into a political plaything for the Premier. What we areopposed to is the dishonest creation of perceptions rather than the real delivery of infrastructure. That iswhat we are opposed to. We continue to support—and will continue to support—and we will continue topressure the government to provide some real solutions to the water crisis that grips south-eastQueensland and has such an impact on the lives of everyone who lives in south-east Queensland. It hasbeen a constant message which we have brought to this House and brought to the public debate overthe last six or seven years. It is a message that the Beattie government has ignored to its peril and forwhich it is now paying the price and, more accurately, for which the people of south-east Queenslandare paying the price.

I want to look in some detail at what the Water Amendment Bill does. The bill defines the functionof the commission and the roles and the powers it will have as well as actually setting up thecommission. Once again, we need to refer to page 2 of the explanatory notes and those four functionsthat I outlined before. The main functions of the commission are to advise the ministers on issuesrelating to water supply and demand management. This supposedly could include the need for and thetiming of new infrastructure, preferences between forms of infrastructure and sources of supply, anddemand management measures such as the triggers for water restrictions. Once again, it is important tounderstand and reinforce that the commission’s role in this important area of infrastructure provision willbe an advisory one rather than a determinative one. It will be an advisory one. The decision making willcontinue to reside with the minister. That is made very clear in the bill.

The bill requires that the minister must issue a report and develop a regional water securityprogram within four months of receiving advice from the commission. I note from the council’ssubmission to the state government that this section of the bill was to include a requirement that thecommission’s report to the minister is tabled within seven days of its receipt. Somewhere along the line


this provision has been omitted. I hope that this is one of the amendments that the minister will bring tothe House following the submission that has been made by the Local Government Association and thecouncils. If he does not, the opposition will be moving an amendment to this clause to ensure that thecommission’s advice is made public. When the commission provides advice to the minister, the ministerhas an obligation under this bill to, within seven days, table that advice in this parliament so thateveryone can see what the commission has advised and everyone can see what the commission hastold the minister is necessary and make their own judgement about the decisions that the ministermakes once he has received that advice.

Under the bill, the regional water security program overrides council plans and the IntegratedPlanning Act. I note that the councils are also seeking clarification around the implications of this sectionin relation to infrastructure charges plans made under the Integrated Planning Act. It is the intention thatthe commission will require the relevant assessment manager to include a funding component in theICP whereby the funding would then be diverted to the regional operating entity. The council’ssubmission states that the timing of the funding is critical and there needs to be certainty as to whether itwould be a developer or the community who would pay for the water infrastructure.

Proposed section 360 of the bill outlines how the commission reports on regional water securityprograms. In their submission to the state government, the SEQ Council of Mayors and the LocalGovernment Association of Queensland have called for this reporting to occur annually, to be madepublic and to outline all of the commission’s activities for the year being reported upon. They have alsocalled for any directions received from the minister, any reports given by the commission to the ministeralong with the minister’s response to those reports. This is a sensible suggestion. I will be interested inthe minister’s views on whether he thinks the legislation should be amended, whether he brings into thisparliament an amendment to provide the commission with more direction on how it should report to thepublic. It is critically important that that reporting mechanism is transparent and well understood so thatthe commission is not allowed to become a buck-passing opportunity for a minister who, like ministers inthe past, is reluctant to act.

The bill also outlines that the commission will set objectives for water service providers. It willoversee regional water security programs and it will enforce compliance with water security programs.The commission also has the power to set water restrictions across its gazetted region and overridelocal councils with regard to water restrictions. That has been the cause of some consternation andsome debate. It is something that, on balance, the opposition is prepared to support. But there is a needto have consistent water restrictions or an ability to set consistent water restrictions across a region sothat we do not have a situation where householders on different sides of the street are operating underdifferent regimes. On balance, we are prepared to do that.

Proposed section 360 of the bill focuses on system operating plans, which basically means thepractical application of a regional water security program that has been approved by the minister. Thesesystem operating plans are really where the rubber meets the road, to coin a phrase. The commission isto develop system operating plans which set the rules for the region’s water supply system, how waterwill be shared in the region and the service objectives and other obligations imposed on water serviceproviders. The department of natural resources briefing note, which has been provided to theopposition, states—The Commission will ensure that all infrastructure identified in the program is developed. The Commission will not be a proponentfor new infrastructure. However, if the program identifies new infrastructure that is to be built, the Commission will have a role inco-ordinating a market-based process to identify a proponent to undertake the development.

How that is going to work in reality is something we can only all guess at. It remains for thegovernment to decide to build the infrastructure. It remains for the minister to make the decision. It is upto the minister to include the infrastructure in the regional water security program and then it issupposedly up to the Water Commission to ensure that the infrastructure is developed and to facilitateits development. The opportunities for buck-passing in a system such as that are endless. The wholestructure provides endless opportunities for procrastination and blame shifting if the attitude that hasbeen such a part of this government and such a part of a succession of ministers is continued into thefuture.

In a nutshell, the commission’s role will be limited to advising the minister on regional watersecurity options. It will have no role in ensuring that those options are taken up or anything is actuallydelivered. The commission’s area of responsibility is set out in the bill and it broadly covers south-eastQueensland, extending from Noosa in the north to the Gold Coast in the south and west to Gatton andEsk. However, the minister can direct the commission to operate in regions in other parts of Queenslandand, of course, it has been a question that has been raised by other councils as to the government’sintent with regard to extending the area of operation of the commission. I will certainly be looking forassurances from the minister in regard to proposed section 360 when we come to the consideration indetail stage. I will be looking for some indication from the minister to put to rest the fears of councils inother areas that the gazetted area of the commission is going to be extended at the whim of the minister.


The bill provides for the area of the commission’s jurisdiction to be extended. I think thegovernment has a responsibility to outline its reasons for extending the area of the commission’sjurisdiction. A briefing note provided to the opposition by the Department of Natural Resources, Minesand Water states—There would be appropriate consultation with the relevant local governments and with the Local Government Association ofQueensland before the jurisdiction of the Commission was extended.

That would be in stark contrast to the consultation that was undertaken before the initiallegislation was drawn up. Because there was no consultation and because there was nothing that couldbe regarded as ‘appropriate consultation’ there is some reticence to accept the government’s word onthat particular issue. There is nothing in the bill that guarantees that that will be the case. In a letter tothe Premier dated 4 May, the LGAQ and the SEQ Council of Mayors stated—There is also a requirement to ensure full consultation with local government authorities in relation to the designation of otherregions by the Minister.

Given the track record of consultation on this particular bill, the council of mayors wants thisprovided for in the legislation. I would suggest to the minister that it would be very appropriate for him toinclude that in one of the amendments that I hope he will introduce into this House before the conclusionof this debate.

The bill sets out the principles that the commission must consider in performing its role. Forexample, it sets out that water is to be shared across the region, that water catchments need to behealthy and that the water supply must be delivered efficiently and cost-effectively. I understand that thecouncils also want this section of the bill amended to more accurately convey the commission’sobjectives, including references with responsibilities for ensuring that it considers water quality issueswhen determining future water supply options.

Councils have suggested inserting an amendment to section 346 stating that the commissionshould consider the principle that water quality is managed from its source to the customer in a mannerthat ensures the sustainable protection of primary sources, including ecosystems and naturalcatchment, and delivers water of a quality desired by customers at the lowest overall cost. Thosecouncils have also suggested inserting a clause in the bill relating to flood mitigation and dam safety.

The opposition will be watching with interest to see whether the state government accepts theadvice of the councils and rewords this section of the legislation. It would be fair to do that, as I saidbefore, given the lack of consultation. These things would normally be the subject of consultation duringthe preparation of the bill and included in the bill when it is introduced into the House. Because that didnot happen, I think there is an opportunity for some extensive amendments to take into account thosevery valid concerns that have been raised by those stakeholders.

Under the terms of the bill, the Water Commission will comprise a chairperson and at least twoother commissioners who cannot be members of parliament or councillors. Commissioners will beappointed for three years and there is a capacity for additional commissioners to be appointed in thefuture if required.

Under the terms of the bill, the commission is to be funded via an annual levy on the water serviceprovided. How much that levy will be and how the quantum of that levy is to be established is notstipulated in the bill. Because it is not stipulated, it certainly leaves room for doubt. In the considerationin detail stage I will be seeking some detail about the government’s intentions with regard to how muchthe government envisages that levy being and how the payment of that levy is to be administered.

In his second reading speech the Premier said that the state would pay about $2.5 million for thefirst year of the commission’s work but that south-east Queensland councils, in his words, ‘haveindicated support in principle for a licence fee’ to pay for the commission after that. However, I think thatwas aspirational thinking on the part of the Premier. As reported in the Courier-Mail yesterday, nothingcould be further from the truth. Noosa Mayor, Councillor Bob Abbott, said—It is ridiculous; it’s their responsibility.

I could not agree more. Planning at this level is the responsibility of the state government. Mayor Abbottwent on to say—They need to stop abrogating their responsibilities and passing them to local governments.

That is something that this state government has been doing across a range of administrativeareas for many years now—that is, abrogating its responsibilities to local governments and shifting thecost on to local governments. It is a constant and very justifiable complaint of local governments all overthe state. They continue to be saddled with extra responsibility and extra costs due to the abrogation ofthis state government’s responsibilities.

The spokesman for the Lord Mayor of Brisbane is quoted in the paper as saying—Why would we want to be paying for something extra? It hasn’t be discussed and it’s unlikely to be supported.

The President of the Local Government Association of Queensland, Councillor Paul Bell, said—It wasn’t endorsed. It wasn’t discussed.’


The coalition agrees with the councils. The state government should not be cost shifting. We willintroduce an amendment that proposes that the state government pay for the commission, not thecouncils. We will attempt in this House to ensure that the state government meets its responsibilities andin this instance does not have an opportunity to abrogate its responsibilities to local governments and toshift the cost, as it has done so many times in the past, on to local governments and their ratepayers.

I note that the council of mayors and the Local Government Association of Queensland stated intheir letter to the Premier that further clarification of the commission’s role in relation to rural watersupplies will also be important, not only in the context of south-east Queensland but also in otherdesignated regions. I, too, would like further clarification of the role of the commission in relation to ruralwater supplies because there are rural water users in the area that has been gazetted as part of thecommission’s activities.

Section 360 of the legislation states that the commission must make reasonable endeavours toconsult with each proposed water service provider for the plan area, but failure to consult does notinvalidate or otherwise affect the plan. It is understandable that councils are concerned that there is noobligation on the commission to consult with councils. That concern is certainly highlighted by the trackrecord of the government in the introduction of this legislation. We will also move an amendment toensure that the commission must seek input from water service providers.

In their submission to the state government the councils have also suggested that sections of thislegislation relating to system operating plans should be expanded. I am interested in hearing theminister’s response to their suggestions. It is in terms of the system operating plans where the mostcrucial interaction will occur between the commission and the local governments. It is important not onlythat there is a common understanding of how that interaction is going to occur but also that thestakeholder views are taken into account. Section 360 provides that water service providers—in mostcases that is the councils—must comply with system operating plans or face fines of up to $124,875.There is certainly some obligation on the minister to justify the size of that possible fine.

One of the areas that has received the most publicity in this part of the legislation provides for thecommission to impose its own water restrictions. On balance, the coalition is prepared to accept that. Ithas been the cause of some debate. As I understand it, the general view of the LGAQ is that it isconcerned about the role and the responsibilities of the commission and the relationship between thecouncils and the minister in determining major plans for the regions. The costs to be borne by thecouncils will be problematic when the commission’s operations are extended to other regions. We willbe pursuing that in the consideration in detail stage of the debate.

Overall, this legislation is really about the Beattie Labor government being seen to be doingsomething in a water crisis it has created. I conclude by reinforcing what I said at the beginning of mycontribution. This legislation will be supported in the House but it will provide no extra water for thepeople of south-east Queensland unless there is a major attitudinal change on the part of thegovernment. The setting up of the Water Commission cannot be allowed to provide an opportunity forthe government to abrogate its responsibilities.

Time expired. Mr HOPPER (Darling Downs—NPA) (3.59 pm): I will speak briefly to a few issues relating to the

Water Amendment Bill. It seems to only extend from Noosa in the north to the Gold Coast in the southand to Gatton and Esk in the west. We all realise that that is the major area in the south-east wherepeople are coming in over the border and trying to settle. No doubt there is a lot of pressure on thatarea. When this bill was first spoken about in parliament the member for Toowoomba South, MikeHoran, came to me and said that he thought it was a good idea to have a Water Commission. Then wegot to the bottom of exactly how the commission works and we found that it really does not have a lot todo at all.

The most disappointing factor is that the area around Toowoomba is not included at all. I see thatthe minister can direct the commission to operate in regions in other parts of Queensland. That will allowfor that to take place. As we know, Toowoomba is experiencing a major water crisis. It is in a desperatesituation. The town’s three dams are nearly at their lowest level. We have often heard the mayor ofToowoomba, Di Thorley, speak about Toowoomba being a city on top of a hill. That makes it very hardfor that city to get water. We all know what is happening with the federal minister, Malcolm Turnbull,announcing that there will be a vote on whether Toowoomba City Council will recycle water. I think thewording of the question that the people will vote on is extremely unfair. However, the majority of thecouncil voted for that wording. I know that the council is going to put a lot of money into the campaign forthe ‘yes’ vote. It is all right to recycle water, but you need water to recycle water. You cannot continuallyrecycle water until you get more water. I believe that the mayor has simply not looked at a lot of the otheroptions as to where Toowoomba can get water.

I refer to the coal seam gas water that is used by gas drilling companies. For those members whodo not realise this, I point out that when those companies drill down and hit gas in the Great ArtesianBasin, the water comes to the surface with the gas. All that those companies want is the gas; the wateris a by-product. There are companies out there with fine mist sprays that are evaporating thousands andthousands of megalitres of water into the air. That is a rape of the environment.


I am a farmer. I can no longer drill a hole and get an irrigation licence. Yet because our gascompanies are mining a natural resource that is needed for the energy grid, they can drill down andallow water to evaporate into the sky. The Queensland Gas Company’s drill site runs almost beside theCondamine River. I honestly believe that that company should at least be made to clean the water that itdrills out and put it into the river to create an environmental flow that could be used by irrigators south ofthat location.

As I said earlier, I know that the mayor is not very interested in this coal seam gas water. Once Iheard her say that it was too hard to clean the water. Only last week Dalby received an announcementfrom the federal government that it will put in a $10 million desalination plant and pipeline out to ArrowEnergy, which is a coal seam gas company that is going to pump water up that will be sent to Dalby andput through a reverse osmosis plant. I know that some people think that Dalby is drinking Toowoomba’swaste water through the Oakey Creek system. Dalby has a number of bores. Salty water is pumped outof this coal seam. It is put through a reverse osmosis plant which puts the salt into storage tanks. Therewill be a problem with the salt that we take out of the water. However, I know that the mayor and hiscouncil are currently addressing that issue. The point I am making is that this water can be recycled.

Thousands of megalitres of water is being taken out of the ground by the Queensland GasCompany. Origin Energy has conducted drilling in that area and has found major strikes of water. Someof that water from those strikes is potable. It will be interesting to see if they check the wells that they willtake the water from. The money that Toowoomba is going to put into this recycled toilet to tap—whatever you want to call it—drinking water would pay for the construction of that pipeline toToowoomba. I think we should put some pressure on those major companies that are drilling in thatarea.

I have talked to the Deputy Leader of the National Party, Jeff Seeney, about Emu Creek, which islocated just north of Toowoomba. I would like to see a dam built on Emu Creek. It is a wonderfulcatchment. We have had from this government this wonderful proposal to build a dam at Gympie. If adam was built on Emu Creek, it would involve resuming about four farms at the most. Some of that areais absolutely mongrel country, but it will catch a great flow of water. That dam could be a fourth watersupply for Toowoomba.

People say that dams are no good because they go dry. But if we had four dams that are a thirdfull, if we add that capacity together that would equate to over one completely full dam. So the moredams we build, the better off we are. We will have that resource as a backup supply. I think that we haveto look seriously at Toowoomba’s water supply. We need to impress upon people the need to userainwater tanks. We need to look at the provisions that councils have made that deter people from usingrainwater tanks. We need to put pressure on those councils. If this commission can do anything towardsachieving that, that would be wonderful.

Some councils will not even let people shower with tank water. I have lived on tank water all mylife. At home I have two 10,000 gallon tanks that catch water from the roof. Those tanks are full. I run thetoilets on bore water, but my drinking water, my bathwater, my shower water and the water used by thedishwasher and the washing machine is tank water. A family of three children and two adults can get bywith those two tanks of water that receive that catchment.

Tanks do not look ugly. They can be placed under pergolas or in garages. Houses can bedesigned to have water tanks positioned where they are not seen. I think we really need to promote thefact that tanks do not need to look ugly. People say that the catchment off the roof is dirty water anddetrimental to their health. Nowadays water tanks are fitted with traps in the form of a PVC pipe with a Yin it. The first flush of water that comes off the roof gets caught in that trap and does not go into the tank.We simply have to encourage the use of tank water.

Last year at Farmfest I saw a fellow at a little stand selling slow-release tap washers that he hadinvented. They were just amazing water savers. If you fit one of these tap washers to your tap, all thewater you need will come out of the tap. Admittedly, it might take an extra few seconds to fill a saucepanor something like that. But when you turn the tap on, there is not that massive flush of water. This is justa little cone-shaped tap washer that only—

Mr Palaszczuk: He comes from Pittsworth, does he?Mr HOPPER: Yes. It is a magnificent invention. We have to get serious about saving water. In relation to the infrastructure that has been put in place in Queensland over the past eight years,

I honestly think that in 10 years time if someone is asked, ‘What did Beattie build?’ they would say afootbridge and a football stadium. I ask members to look at what Joh did—the Burdekin Falls Dam, ourports and our electric train system. The proposal to build a dam at Gympie is just an announcement.Previously we heard the Deputy Leader of the National Party talk about the Gympie proposal. Thisannouncement plays with people’s lives and minds.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O’Brien): Order! The member will direct his comments through thechair.


Mr HOPPER: Mr Deputy Speaker, at the moment we are seeing a farce in Queensland. If I was abackbencher in this government, I would be very nervous at this moment. This major announcementwas brought forward. It gets people’s hopes up. The government is going to go to the polls. That is whatthe Premier has up his sleeve. With this great announcement people think, ‘He’s going to build a dam,’but I ask members to consider the damage that is involved. That dam will be located in some of therichest country in Queensland. I am not against building dams. I think that building dams is wonderful.But the expense involved in resuming all those homes on that land will be simply amazing. For thatmuch money we could probably go back to the Bradford scheme and divert a northern river. Thegovernment has to resume the land and buy out the dairy farmers who are currently on that land. Someof those dairy farmers are milking 1,500 cows with brand-new rotary dairies and travelling irrigators.What about the homes that will have to be resumed? That will involve massive costs. Does the ministerhave a clue as to what the final figure will be? I think it is simply amazing. There is no doubt that thisdam will be big and wonderful, but the cost involved will be simply astounding.

The pipeline that will take recycled water to Tarong goes right beside Wivenhoe Dam. Does theminister have any intention of filling the dam with that water? It has to happen. Why else would thepipeline be located right beside the Wivenhoe Dam? When that announcement was made I becameexcited, because there is no way in the world Tarong is ever going to need that much water. There is noway in the world Stanwell will use all of that water. So the irrigators in the Lockyer—and the member forLockyer has a farm and so do his mates—may get to tap into that water. That is a start. There will be toomuch water for the Lockyer. Hopefully, we can push that water up over the range to the Darling Downs.We could go right back to the work done by Phil Jauncey and others on Vision 2000. I think that theminister might have a card up his sleeve. I think if he has his way the people of Brisbane may well andtruly be drinking recycled water in the near future.

I totally agree with the comments of the shadow minister and his theory on the spin doctors of thisgovernment and what it is going to do with this dam. I think that what the government is putting thepeople of Queensland through is just horrific. It should put up some money and show some action.

Mr WILSON (Ferny Grove—ALP) (4.10 pm): It is with pleasure that I rise to speak in support ofthe Water Amendment Bill 2006. Like the shadow minister, I believe that the formation of theQueensland Water Commission is a very good idea. I believe that the Queensland Water Commissionand the more coordinated and strategic approach to water planning it will deliver are overdue. Icommend the Premier and the minister for water for bringing this legislation before the House sopromptly after the review of institutional arrangements for water in south-east Queensland.

The South East Queensland Regional Plan highlighted the need for a review of institutionalarrangements for water supply in south-east Queensland. While population pressures are a key driver,the drought has highlighted many problems with the existing arrangements. In response, thegovernment initiated a review of institutional arrangements for urban and related rural water supply insouth-east Queensland. As part of this review, the government considered the views of local councils,water service providers and other stakeholders.

From this process, the government has moved this year to prepare for the establishment of thecommission. The commission will be an independent, expertise based entity which will provide advice tothe Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Water about how to achieve a sustainable water supplyfor the region. It will be made up of three members, one of whom will be the chairperson. Theappointment of commission members is on the basis of expertise and knowledge in relevant areas.There is scope for the appointment of additional members of the commission.

The commission will conduct its business in a manner similar to the way other commissionsoperate. The Queensland Water Commission will perform four main functions. These are to provideadvice to the government for achieving regional water security; to facilitate the implementation of thestate government’s regional water security program; to ensure compliance with the government’sregional water security program and with the operating rules for the regional water supply system; andto impose and enforce water restrictions in circumstances where the commission considers it to benecessary in the interests of ensuring security of water supply.

In terms of providing advice to the government, the commission may refer to both supply options,such as new infrastructure, and demand management options, such as water restrictions or othermeasures aimed at reducing demand for water. The state government will consider the commission’sadvice and will develop a regional water security program, which will set out what actions are to beundertaken to ensure that the region will have a secure water supply in the future.

In terms of assisting the government to deliver the regional water security program, thecommission will ensure that infrastructure identified in the program is built, but it will not be a proponentitself. The commission will set rules about how a region’s water supply system will be operated. Theserules will apply to relevant water providers in the region.

With regard to compliance with the government’s regional water security program and with theoperating rules for the regional water supply system, the commission’s role will be clear. Water service


providers such as local governments who do not comply with the operating rules may have theirnoncompliance made public, and will also be subject to monetary penalties of up to $124,875 perbreach.

In terms of imposing and enforcing water restrictions in circumstances, the commission mustconsider whether it is necessary to do so in the interests of ensuring security of water supply.Establishment of the Queensland Water Commission signals the start of a new era of water supplyplanning in south-east Queensland.

Why does the shadow minister for natural resources think the Water Commission is a ‘goodidea’? Because it is a good idea. It is a further advance for water security firstly in south-eastQueensland and in other parts of the state. Why, then, has the shadow minister, who has held thisposition for five years, not proposed a commission? Why, then, has the opposition not presented acoherent and comprehensive strategy for south-east Queensland’s future water needs?

Mr Shine: It’s crazy. Mr WILSON: It is crazy. The fact is that the National Party has no serious plans to tackle the

challenges of water. Mr Lawlor: No serious plans for anything.Mr WILSON: I take that interjection. The opposition leader says the answer is Wyaralong Dam.

There is no single project that can adequately address the short-, medium- and long-term water needsof the state’s south-east. There is no ‘either/or’ or choices here. We need a recycled water pipeline forindustry. We need a regional water grid. We need to seriously assess the proposed desalination plant atTugun. We need to build new water storages. We need to save and conserve water by reducing watermain breaks and inefficient use of water at home and at work. The government strategy encompassesall of these features. The National Party is bereft of any strategy.

Mr Lawlor: Whinge and whine. Mr WILSON: I take that interjection, too. It believes a single dam which it has previously promised

will be completed within four to 59 years is the answer. If the National Party thinks Wyaralong Dam is theanswer, then it does not understand the question.

A new dam on the Logan River with good yields is part of the answer. In opposition, the NationalParty has shown it is lazy on policy development across the full range of portfolios and issues. Thisopposition is interested, regrettably, in opposing most things to hide its unfortunate divisions anddisagreements. The opposition, I dare say, only begrudgingly supports what it knows is good policy. Iurge the opposition to get on board with local councils and actively support the government’s waterstrategy. I commend the bill to the House.

Hon. KR LINGARD (Beaudesert—NPA) (4.17 pm): The opposition supports the object of theWater Amendment Bill 2006, which is to establish a Queensland Water Commission as an essential firststep to delivering greater water security to south-east Queensland. The bill establishes the QueenslandWater Commission, and the shadow spokesman has already spoken about this in great detail.

I note that the object of the bill is ‘to ensure the delivery of sustainable and secure water supplyand demand management’ for south-east Queensland, and certainly we would agree to that. I am notsure whether the government will be knocked over with applications from people to become members ofthis commission, because water will be an extremely controversial topic over the next few months andthe next few years.

My comments also relate to what has happened with regard to the Rathdowney or Tilley’s Bridgeconcept over the last few days. I was extremely concerned, and I agree with some of the people therewho were disgusted, to find out that last Wednesday the Premier landed on a nearby property in ahelicopter and announced a dam, and the announcement was aired on TV that night. No-one in the areaknew anything about it. The only way we found out about it on Wednesday was when someone fromone of the TV stations came in and asked questions of a person who lives on the dam site. That was theonly way we found out that this concept was being promoted.

I think it is ironic that it was also the same day on which the announcement of the privatisation ofEnergex was made. Just two or three days before that I was involved in the Suncorp Stadium discussionin which Cyclone Larry became the major point as a diversionary tactic. There is no doubt that aroundRathdowney last Wednesday and Thursday most people thought that this latest announcement was justanother diversionary tactic by the government, that the Premier was trying to divert attention away fromthe privatisation of Energex. However, obviously within two days people had become quite concernedthat he was genuine in what he was doing.

I am disgusted that, having announced the matter last Wednesday and knowing that maps wereavailable—I have a copy of a map which is dated 3 May and landholders were clearly defined on thatmap—until this morning, there has been absolutely no notification to any of those landholders.Admittedly, last Friday night, after pressuring the Premier and the minister, we obtained copies of those


maps, and anyone who wanted to see them probably could have done so. However, as a matter ofcourtesy—and I asked the minister this question this morning—if he was the person involved and hisproperty was going under, he would be entitled to ask for at least some sort of notification, such as aletter to landowners.

Any bureaucrat could have sat down and easily seen which properties would be affected. In fact,I understand that last Friday, under pressure, one of the minister’s departmental officers answeredquestions from people who had put pressure on the department. The officer was able to say to thepeople who were affected, ‘Yes, your property will go under and the rest of the property will be resumed.’Quite honestly, something better could have been done by the department and by the government.

One reason that I do not, and will not, support the dam is that this is not a new dam site atRathdowney or Tilley’s Bridge. This is not a new concept. This concept was around before the MaroonDam. In fact, when the Maroon Dam was being built on the Logan River, both of those sites werediscussed. The people who live near the dam site at Tilley’s Bridge know that government surveyorswent down at least 63 feet and were unable to find any firm foundations. They believe that someequipment from that particular survey is still down there. After that survey, the Maroon Dam site waschosen. There is no doubt that the Maroon Dam is a smaller site.

When one looks at the proposed site on paper, it looks to be a magnificent site with 230,000megalitres of water. However, it certainly has failings as far as the wall is concerned. The wall betweenMax Tilley’s mountain and Mrs McCormack’s property is a natural wall which is cut by the Maroon-Rathdowney road. I cannot understand, and nor can the residents, if the government was not successfulin finding a dam wall site then, how it can find one now. Why has it not gone back to the originalsurveys? Why has it now, all of a sudden, come up with a concept to build—

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr English): Order! If you look at the clock, you will see that I have giventhe member a fair degree of leniency. The bill relates to the establishment of a Water Commission, notparticularly the dam. If you are making a general point, please make it and return to the bill.

Mr LINGARD: Yes, I will come back to the bill and how the Water Commission will suggest thatthese concepts be developed. Another reason I certainly do not believe that this particular dam site isrelevant is the cost of replacement of the Mount Lindesay Highway. Anyone who goes down there wouldknow that if a dam is built at that particular site, the whole Mount Lindesay Highway out to the PalenCreek prison will have to be replaced. Similarly, from Rathdowney to Maroon, that whole road will haveto be replaced. Why would there be any suggestion by someone—not in this case the WaterCommission, but someone—that Tilley’s Bridge is more reliable?

Another question I ask the minister is who will look at these hydrology reports? Will it be the WaterCommission who looks at the hydrology reports and who comes back and says that it does not believeWyaralong should be built? Obviously that is what has happened on the present Wyaralong site. Thegovernment has purchased at least 37 per cent of the properties for the Wyaralong site. Something hashappened for it to now say, all of a sudden, that Wyaralong might not be as viable as Tilley’s Bridge.Who will make these decisions? Will it be the Water Commission? Are they the people who will say tothe government that they believe another site should be established?

If the government has hydrology reports that state that Wyaralong has dropped in its yield and wenow need to look for a new site, that is extremely controversial. In this particular case, I would also saythat Tilley’s Bridge has dropped and that Tilley’s Bridge is not running at anywhere near the level it wasrunning previously. Why would one go onto the same site as the Maroon Dam? Why would one choosethat site, especially when the Logan Action Group and I went to the minister and spoke to him personallyand he did not mention anything about Tilley’s Bridge and nor did any of his bureaucrats. Yet it is amagnificent site, which would include Christmas Creek and Running Creek. Running Creek is the bestcreek for water of the whole lot down there. Below the sites of Christmas Creek, Running Creek, theLogan River and Barney Creek—Palen Creek is useless because no water at all is coming out ofthere—one would be able to have off-stream storage and receive excellent water from Running Creekwhich comes out of the Lamington Plateau.

I just wonder what the rule is for sites in front of a dam wall. How far away does a school have tobe from a dam wall before it is completely replaced? How far away does a township like Rathdowneyhave to be?

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I encourage you to come back to the bill, please.Mr LINGARD: Yes. That is a pity because I think that this is certainly a very relevant conversation

at present. I think it is something that the Water Commission would have to be involved in. Obviously, Iwas asking the minister if the Water Commission will give him this advice in the future. Who decides? Inthe future, if he comes up with a site like Bromelton, who gives him that advice? Does the WaterCommission come back to him and give him that advice, or does he tell the Water Commission to goand investigate a new site like Bromelton?

Also, who will give advice in relation to new pipelines? I accept that the western corridor shouldbe an excellent example of bringing greywater from Bundamba back to Swanbank. I support that in itsentirety. I support waste water being brought back to the Tarong powerhouse. However, who then


makes the decision about the water that is saved from Moogerah Dam? If Swanbank takes 8,500megalitres, who makes the decision about where the 8,500 megalitres is used in future?

It is priority water. It probably costs 57c. That 57c cannot be paid by irrigators. Quite obviously, ifwestern corridor water comes back, that brings greywater back to Swanbank. Will it be used as prioritywater for the industries of Ipswich or will it be saved for the irrigators of the Boonah area?

Also, I think that the south-east Queensland pipeline is a concept that can work—from Wivenhoeto Chambers Flat; Chambers Flat to be used by the Beaudesert shire for development in the future; andfrom there a pipeline down to Cedar Grove Weir, but obviously a pipeline would be built from CedarGrove down to Wyaralong. Will the minister put a pipeline from Cedar Grove Weir out to Rathdowney?

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I ask you to return to the bill or I will have you resume your seat.Mr LINGARD: I accept your comments but I am asking the minister if this Water Commission will

make those sorts of decisions. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr English): Order! Again, you have asked a question and that is a fair

enough question.Mr LINGARD: Will the Water Commission make decisions about the Hinze Dam in the future,

about where that water will go? Will it make decisions about whether water from the Hinze Dam can bebrought back to Cedar Grove Weir or to Chambers Flat? Is the minister saying that, no, the WaterCommission will not make any of those decisions, and those decisions are purely governmentdecisions? We do not believe that these two dams that he is promoting will be built. We believe that theyare so costly that they will never be built.

Dr LESLEY CLARK (Barron River—ALP) (4.30 pm): In rising to participate in the debate on theWater Amendment Bill 2006, I would like to address the issue of climate change and what it means towater supply in Queensland. The majority of climate change models predict increased variability ofrainfall and an overall decrease in rainfall over much of the state in the future. Studies indicate thatrainfall for coastal areas south of Cairns has consistently declined since the early 1900s, particularly incentral Queensland where it has decreased by five to 10 millimetres per decade.

Since 1950 rainfall decline has been more rapid—about 50 millimetres per decade decline or 250millimetres in total. However, the average intensity of coastal rainfall has increased. Predicted changesin annual average rainfall indicate a decrease over much of the state with further decline in annualrainfall of up to 30 per cent in most areas by 2030.

At the same time as rainfall is declining in most of the state and becoming more variable,Queensland will need more water due to population growth and economic development. Watervariability in the future is one of Queensland’s major climate change vulnerabilities. South-eastQueensland has experienced a marked drying trend, as I have said, since the 1950s and also anincrease in intense rainfall events, and this is consistent with future projections for the region based onall the studies available.

More than a quarter of all population growth in Australia over the next 25 years is expected to bein the south-east corner of Queensland. The combined effect of rapid population growth and climatechange will be a major challenge. The Queensland government has moved to ensure that the state hasa policy and regulatory environment that actively promotes, provides incentives for and, wherenecessary, mandates community-wide adjustments to the way we use water. Initiatives have beenintroduced to better position the state for climate change and a water constrained future, and I would liketo outline those to the House to indicate the extent of the government’s preparedness.

Firstly, there is resource planning to determine long-term water needs and allocations on aregional basis and the best ways to meet human and environmental water needs, including water supplysharing rules to ensure water is used in the best way during times of critical supply such as droughtconditions. Secondly, there is diversifying supply options to reduce the dependency on vulnerablesupply options and improve water security and address climate vulnerability, climate change and othersupply risks. Options being investigated include stormwater harvesting, waste water reuse and aquiferstorage to diversify water supplies.

Thirdly, we are undertaking drought contingency planning to ensure communities have a clearstrategy to deal with restricted water supplies during potentially more severe droughts, includingproviding advice on alternative water supplies, recycling and water use efficiency practices andrequiring water service providers to prepare drought management plans. Also, we are using economicinstruments such as the trading of water allocations, allowing water to be put to higher and better valueuses; revising infrastructure subsidies to require local governments to adopt total water cyclemanagement principles, minimise water losses and adopt water consumption targets in order to qualifyfor state government subsidies; encouraging improved industrial and commercial water use by providingsubsidies to water users to reduce water consumption and promote the widespread take-up of waterefficient devices, water recycling and use of fit-for-purpose water; and encouraging improved rural wateruse by providing guidelines, training and funding to assist the adoption of better water and irrigation


practices, technologies and services. The water available in all Queensland irrigation systems, takinginto account recent rainfall trends and the uncertainties due to climate variability and, where possible,climate change, is also being re-evaluated.

Also, we are developing legislation to allow the use of recycled water, including dual reticulation,in residential development and public spaces and to allow Queenslanders to use domestic greywater insewered areas for irrigating gardens and lawns; and supporting research that assesses the impact ofclimate change on stream flows and water quality and commissioning evaporation mitigation trials toassess the effectiveness and economic viability of cover technologies for farm dams and town watersupplies. Finally, we are undertaking community education to raise the awareness of the communityabout the need to use water more efficiently.

In the face of this extensive suite of diverse measures, the opposition’s claim that the governmenthas done nothing is seen for what it is: just nonsense. The Queensland government is also a signatoryto the National Water Initiative that provides an agreed national approach and framework that assignsthe risk and management approach for future reductions in water availability, including reduction ofwater availability arising from natural events such as climate change.

The Queensland government is delivering on its commitments to national water reform as asignatory to the National Water Initiative. Indeed, when the Howard government released the NationalWater Commission’s assessment of the performance of the states and territories, Queensland was theonly mainland state not to face a financial penalty.

The establishment of the Queensland Water Commission, provided for in this legislation, is animportant initiative from the Queensland government to deal with declining water supplies inQueensland and I commend the government for this initiative. I note that initially the commission’s focuswill be on south-east Queensland, and this is most appropriate. However, the government has indicatedthat the commission’s focus could extend beyond south-east Queensland to address similar institutionalarrangement issues in other regions. It is just good sense for the government to look at other parts of thestate where region-wide water supply strategies, including the far north, are under development forpossible coverage by the commission. Similar strategies are also under development in centralQueensland, while the government has committed to developing region-wide water supply plans for theWide Bay-Burnett and Mackay-Whitsunday regions.

The purpose of the far-north Queensland water strategy is to develop a long-term strategy fordelivering the region’s water supply needs over the next 50 years. The strategy will explore the surfaceand groundwater resources in parts of the Barron, Mulgrave, North Johnstone, Herbert and Daintreecatchments in the local government areas of Cairns city, Mareeba shire, Atherton shire, Eacham shire,Douglas shire and Herberton shire.

The focus of this study will be upon water use efficiency and demand management and, wherenecessary, determine the time lines for infrastructure needs triggered by urban population growth andclimate change such that key sites for future water supply can be protected. The strategy will link to theFNQ2010 Regional Plan, the Barron Water Resource Plan and the Cairns Water least cost planningstudy.

A partnership approach between DNRMW, local government and SunWater is being used tooversee the strategy’s development and a study management committee has been formed, includingrepresentatives from those bodies and also rural industry, and it meets quarterly to provide strategicdirection to the project.

Engineering consultants are preparing the strategy and are working closely with project officersfrom DNRMW. The study consultant has recently completed a literature review and is now undertakingthe technical assessment of options which include a series of focus group meetings throughout theregion.

As I have indicated, this bill does envisage the possibility that the Water Commission focus couldbe extended to other areas of the state, including far-north Queensland, and I would like to take thisopportunity to place on record my strong support for such an initiative and, indeed, encourage thegovernment to extend the role of the Water Commission to far-north Queensland when the water supplystrategy is finalised so that it can ensure its implementation free of political interference, obstruction andinfighting between local authorities in far-north Queensland which unfortunately has dogged south-eastQueensland.

The Cairns City Council and the chamber of commerce have both been involved in a politicalcampaign to get another dam built in far-north Queensland, which has rarely paid attention to the factsor indeed seriously considered demand-side management and more efficient use of existing watersupplies.

The recently completed Cairns City Council least cost water planning study would never havehappened at all had I not initiated this process and obtained support from relevant government ministersto help finance it. I did this because I am determined to ensure that the future water needs of Cairns CityCouncil are met in an environmentally and economically responsible way.


I also successfully lobbied the government to prepare the current FNQ Regional Water SupplyStrategy to ensure that the future water supply needs of the Mareeba, Atherton, Eacham, Douglas andHerberton shires, as well as Cairns City Council, are all met in the same way. These six local authoritiesdo cooperate well on a range of issues through the FNQ Regional Organisation of Councils, but there isno guarantee that this will occur when it comes to future water supplies because they each have theirown preferred options which they have lobbied for in the past. All of these options, which include dams,weirs and even diversion of rivers as well as recycling, the use of greywater, leakage reductions and alldemand management options, are being considered in the preparation of the regional water supplyplan.

However, I want to make it very clear that there is no water crisis in far-north Queensland. Notonly is climate change likely to make the area wetter, the current plans to use water from the BarronRiver and/or the Mulgrave River aquifer will be sufficient for approximately 20 years even with thecurrent projected population growth. So implementation of the least cost planning study and the regionalwater supply strategy, this will ensure that the water needs are met for at least the next 50 years.

Notwithstanding that, I will feel more confident that these plans will achieve their objectives if therole of the Water Commission is extended so that it provides unbiased, expert advice to the stategovernment taking account of the views of local authorities, thereby ensuring long-term water securityfor the wider Cairns region in far-north Queensland—a critical goal shared by everyone in ourcommunity. I commend the bill to the House.

Miss SIMPSON (Maroochydore—NPA) (4.39 pm): In rising to speak to this legislation, I note thatmy colleague the member for Callide has outlined particularly well a number of concerns we have inregard to poor planning of water infrastructure in the state and a number of proposed amendments thatwe will be seeking to make to this legislation.

First of all, I would like to put on the record some of the concerns that have been raised by theMaroochy Shire Council. I think these concerns have been reflected in other councils as well. MaroochyShire Council passed the following resolution on 26 April—1. Council strenuously objects to any SEQ drought contingency project to release water from the Sunshine Coast to the

Brisbane/Wivenhoe sub-region because it potentially compromises the security of water supplies for the Sunshine Coastand it devalues the effective long term water planning that the Sunshine Coast Councils have achieved over severaldecades:Specifically: a. Council objects to any State Government proposal to introduce water restrictions on the Sunshine Coast to free-

up water to redress the obvious water planning deficiencies in the southern part of the region; and,b. Council objects to any State Government proposal to connect the Sunshine Coast water supplies to the southern

part of the region as a drought contingency project.2. Council calls upon the State Government to urgently move from the desktop phase of planning for future water sources

(particularly surface storages) to on-ground preliminary and detailed design because the prolonged delay in this progresswill compromise the security of water supply for both the Sunshine Coast and the SEQ region as a whole.

3. In recognition of the efforts of local government to respond and partner the water reform process, the State Governmentand in particular its institutional arrangements steering committee needs to tangibly demonstrate its consideration of localgovernment’s position including timely responses and statements of reason where local government’s position is notembraced.

In its resolution the Maroochy Shire Council also deals with the institutional arrangements review.There is more I could quote from the concerns raised by the Maroochy shire, but I want to start on thisnote in regard to the legislation that we are currently debating. There are still many unansweredquestions. The state opposition—the National and Liberal Party coalition—has long stated that thereneeds to be good water planning in this state. In fact, we have championed options and committed tooptions in this parliament and publicly. It seems that the Beattie government has only belatedly realisedthere is a crisis when the taps start to run dry. Its response has been more about panicked politics andplanning by press release than real technical data, consultation with stakeholders in the public andgetting the right triple bottom line solutions to address not only short-term issues but also long-termsustainability of water supplies and sustainable growth in this state.

Growth in this state is not a surprise. It amazes me when I hear Labor ministers stand up and say,‘Golly gosh, we have all these people moving to Queensland.’ In fact, the growth rates are quitepredictable if we look at the demographic profiles. To suddenly say, ‘It is a surprise that has come uponus like a thief in the night,’ is irresponsible government by a government that has been there for too longand has started to look for desperate answers to take the heat off its many areas of failure.

There are a number of questions to which we are seeking answers from the government inrelation not only to this commission but also to some of the planning decisions it has already announcedwith no technical data. Whether the Water Commission is going to be the patsy for the bad decisionmaking of this government and its planning by press release we will have to wait and see. Clearly, it isextraordinary to announce the building of a major dam which has never been seriously investigatedpreviously with no on-the-ground, technical data. Who is this mob running government in Queensland?It makes this state look ridiculous. To think that we have a need for environmental impact statements, to


think that we have a need to assess myriad economic impacts and to assess the alternatives fordelivering true short- and long-term water sustainability, and yet this government has done nothing. Weknow that the technical on-the-ground data has not been collected. That was confirmed this morning bythe government in question time. It announced that it would build a dam and then said that it would dothe EIS and all the technical things, but we are still going ahead with this dam unless things proveotherwise. That is an extraordinary way to plan major infrastructure with major impacts. That is not theway to come up with the best triple bottom line solutions to an integrated approach to water supply inthis state.

One wonders whether this Water Commission is simply going to be a patsy and rubber-stamp thebad decisions of this government’s legacy of inaction over the last eight years. We know that there havebeen no on-the-ground surveys. That is quite an extraordinary way to proceed. This resolution of councilwhich I believe was made before the government’s announcement of the major dam was right to saythat technical on-the-ground investigations needed to be done. That is the way to plan good sustainableinfrastructure, to understand the ramifications and to get the best options. It is quite extraordinary thatthis government has not done that. Now it is planning by press release. It announces infrastructurewithout any of the detail and then pats itself on the back as being a great hero of infrastructure delivery.That is a road to ruin if we do not have the right technical data and the right environmental assessments.

The Premier also pooh-poohed a question from the member for Maryborough this morning aboutthe downstream impacts of this particular piece of infrastructure, yet we know that the environmentalimpact statements have not been done. Once again, we see a government that does not plan except bypress release. Now we are to have a Water Commission, the concept of which should be about goodplanning, but will it really just be a patsy for the bad decisions of this government?

The Maroochy Shire Council’s resolution ‘strenuously objects to any SEQ drought contingencyproject to release water from the Sunshine Coast to the Brisbane/Wivenhoe sub-region because itpotentially compromises the security of water supplies for the Sunshine Coast’. I need to explain this,because I realise that it is natural in times of a great crisis for there to be water envy and in areas whereothers are doing okay for people to think ‘why not share?’ The concept of sharing is okay unless you arecompromising the security not only of people’s long-term economic stability but also of their immediatewater security.

I need to explain to people who do not understand the difference between small coastal dams andlonger fill, longer empty dams. Currently with the Sunshine Coast supplies there has been good waterplanning. There has been a recognition that with regard to yield and capacity there is a need to haveanother dam on the Sunshine Coast or supplying the Sunshine Coast in the next 10 to 15 years.However, we must realise what the yield capacity is on the Sunshine Coast versus the greater Brisbanesituation.

I want to cite some figures. The annual yield versus current demand of Wivenhoe, Somerset andNorth Pine dams is 431,000 megalitres per annum versus 300,000 megalitres per annum. Thepercentage yield already utilised is 69.6 per cent. The annual yield versus current demand of LakeBaroon is 38,500 megalitres per annum versus 24,000 megalitres per annum. In the historical no failureyield from 1890 to 2005, it is 34,750 megalitres per annum versus 24,000 megalitres per annum. Thepercentage yield already utilised is 62.3 per cent or 69.1 per cent. In the Brisbane catchment we have asystem where, I am advised by water planners, it can run dry from a protracted drought in about fiveseasons. On the Sunshine Coast, while we have had good rainfall in recent times, if it has threeseasons of drought it can run dry.

The broader security issues are also important on the Sunshine Coast. Thus there is someconcern over the plan to investigate a 20,000-megalitre pipeline to hook Lake Baroon into the greaterBrisbane network. It is a plan which the minister denies but it has been initiated and driven by hisdepartment. It is a plan which has been drafted. The consultant’s brief, which is in draft, has been doneunder DNR specifications. It has been done with a project manager and a project officer who are DNRofficers. This is a secret plan of this government. I wish this minister would come out and admit thesethings.

Mr PALASZCZUK: I rise to a point of order. I find those remarks totally untrue and offensive, andI ask that they be withdrawn.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lee): Order! The member for Maroochydore will withdraw theremarks that the member finds offensive.

Miss SIMPSON: Whatever the minister finds offensive I withdraw. However, let the record note—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Maroochydore, there will be no qualification on your

withdrawal. Either withdraw or do not withdraw. I ask you to withdraw. Miss SIMPSON: I have not misled this House, and that is not a standing order that you can ask

people to withdraw on, that the minister has taken offence.


Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Maroochydore, simply withdraw the comment andthen you can continue with your speech.

Miss SIMPSON: I did withdraw the comment, but I need—Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I do not want to get into a debate. You are welcome to continue

your speech, but you are not going to withdraw your comment and then try to say that you are not reallywithdrawing. I do not want any reflections on me, standing orders or anything else. Just withdraw yourcomment and continue with your speech. It is pretty straightforward.

Miss SIMPSON: I withdraw whatever the minister finds offensive under the standing orders. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. Miss SIMPSON: The minister has to answer this question: if this pipeline investigation is not

being driven by his department, can he explain why the consultant’s brief has been drafted under theDNRMW standing offer arrangement SOANRS316 and the project officer and project director aremembers of his department’s Water Planning Unit? There needs to be openness and accountability inthe water planning process in Queensland, not this secret deal process of this government.

Mr PALASZCZUK: I rise to a point of order. The honourable member again is perpetuating themistruth about a secret deal.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mr PALASZCZUK: I find that offensive and I ask it to be withdrawn. It is untrue and offensive. Miss SIMPSON: I did not refer to the minister; I referred to the government. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I understand from the Clerk that there has to be a personal

reflection in a statement made by a member that someone finds offensive in the chamber. I will beincredibly diligent in pulling up members who make any comment that reflects personally upon amember of the House that that member finds offensive. There was no personal reflection.

Miss SIMPSON: This government is good at secret plans, planning by press release and notactually having an accountable process that involves genuine consultation with the key stakeholders.

We need to have a process of planning for water in this state that is not done in secret by thisgovernment. We need to have an open and accountable process in this government that is not aboutpolitics but is about the triple bottom line of good, sustainable water security and water delivery. Ourinfrastructure needs to be underpinned with good planning. That would then have bipartisan support inthe outcomes.

We have long talked about the need for new dams and new water initiatives to provide thatsustainability. Instead, what we have seen this state government do is come out with an SEQ RegionalPlan with high levels of growth, particularly in the western corridor and with new satellite cities. Myconcern is that the planning this government will be doing is really about environmental vandalism insome parts of the state in order to enable the target populations in the new satellite cities to be achieved.The government will say on the one hand that it is a good environmental manager and it cares aboutpeople, yet it closes its eyes to the fact that it is shifting some of those negative impacts across theregion without due consideration of industry and community impacts. We want to see good triple bottomline planning of infrastructure that is not done with these closed, secret deals of this government withoutthe details being brought into the open.

It is ironic that Noosa, which has a population cap, now may be in the situation where it has to paythe price for an extraordinary piece of infrastructure that will probably inundate the pipeline access intoNoosa. I note that Noosa Shire Council has come out specifically opposed to the Mary River option. Wehave clearly stated that we are opposed to the process that has been used, because new dams must beconstructed with good technical information and the proper environmental statements, which thisgovernment has not got. It is interesting that Noosa, with a population cap, will potentially pay the pricefor the growth of the satellite cities with the four-wheel drives that get washed down on Saturdays inthese new areas. Noosa will pay the price for the population growth in the new satellite cities to thesouth of Brisbane and the west of Ipswich.

The other question this minister has to answer is: are we going to see those areas that still havewater infrastructure capacity actually subsidising, with postage stamp pricing, the new waterinfrastructure that he is bringing online to water Brisbane and the western corridor, in the new satellitecities? Are we going to see Noosa paying a subsidy for the new desalination plant at Currumbin by newpostage stamp pricing of water across this state? It is not equitable and it does not address what Ibelieve is good triple bottom line planning for those who have invested in infrastructure to now subsidisethe growth in those corners that this government failed to plan for.

Let us never forget that it was a Labor government—the Goss government—that canned theWolffdene, which would have certainly meant that there was not this immediate crisis with waterinfrastructure. Let us not forget that it is this government that has announced options with no EIS, noplanning and no consultation. We raise concerns because we want to see sustainable, deliverable


infrastructure rather than ambit claims from this government with options that have never actually beenroad-tested with basic technical data that cause great distress to people on the ground who actually paythe price, not just with their hip pocket but emotionally as they have to put up with the political posturingof a government that has done nothing for eight years and now wants them to pay the ultimate price forits bad planning.

Water infrastructure must be properly planned. It must be open and accountable. It must involvethe key stakeholders. As I have said in relation to the draft consultant’s brief that this government isdrawing up for a pipeline to hook the existing Sunshine Coast water supply into the greater Brisbanenetwork via Caboolture, that is just par for the course with this government. It did not consult when itannounced the new Water Commission. It did not consult when it announced the new water options.Now it is clear that it will not consult when it comes to getting the best options to move into the future.

I do not think the government should be afraid of involving people in the process and lettingpeople have access to that technical data. With regard to the Mary, that may be technical data as far asunderstanding options even with water harvesting that would not require mass inundation. Some of thatis technical information that only the department would have and currently is not publicly available. Thatwould certainly be of assistance to try to understand more innovative and less damaging options whichcurrently are not on the table and are not being considered. We call on the government to stop planningin secret, to start putting the information out and to let people have access to the experts and thetechnical data—to interrogate that to come up with the best sustainable options and to build the bestsustainable options for the future.

It is also mooted that the government has been investigating a second desalination plant—a farlarger one—to the north of the shipping channel in addition to the Currumbin one. These are things thatseem to be known within the circles where the planning is being undertaken, but they need to bebrought out into the open so that the public knows—in fact, some of these investigations that areunderway are being driven by the department of natural resources—and so that there is not onlyinformed debate but also community dialogue and involvement to ensure that the future of this state isnot just a political decision made at cabinet level which is not supported by technical data.

This state is too important to start playing the divisive politics we have seen to date. There arebetter options. We have certainly put forward options that this government has knocked down.Tragically, that is why the taps are now running dry in this state. It is time there is openness andaccountability. I have not seen yet that this legislation goes far enough to provide that opportunity for usto see and understand why certain decisions are made and to provide accountability to ensure the besttriple bottom line delivery of infrastructure that meets the needs of not only south-east Queensland butalso beyond.

Ms JARRATT (Whitsunday—ALP) (5.00 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Water AmendmentBill 2006. As the member for Whitsunday and a member of the minister’s caucus committee I havetaken a very strong interest in the area of water policy. This amendment bill has been well publicised inthe south-east corner for the positive contribution it will make in forming the Water Commission toaddress the fragmented water planning at this end of the state.

This bill ensures the commission can and, I believe, will over time assume responsibility for otherregions. It would be churlish in the extreme to think that the establishment of the commission willimmediately fix water supply issues, whether in Bowen in my electorate or Bowen Hills here in Brisbane.It makes good sense for the outcome of a region-wide water supply strategy to be an examination ofinstitutional arrangements for water in that particular region—the ‘who does what?’ question—and see ifand how that can be improved.

Apart from the south east, strategies are under development in central Queensland and thestate’s far north. Under the Queensland Water Plan released last year the government committed toinitiating strategies for the Wide Bay-Burnett and the Mackay-Whitsunday areas. The minister hasrecently announced the government’s intention to initiate with local councils in the Wide Bay-Burnett thepreliminary work required to get that regional strategy underway in early 2007. I urge the minister to putthe Mackay-Whitsunday strategy on a similar time line. These are very important matters. With climatechange being what it is, time is of the essence. The work done to date in the Central QueenslandRegional Water Supply Strategy has been very well received. I believe the government will have similarstrong cooperation from the local councils and water service providers in the Mackay-Whitsundayregion.

Before concluding my remarks I will refer to two significant water projects important to myelectorate of Whitsunday that put to rest the member for Callide’s assertion that we as a governmenthave done nothing to address water planning issues in this state. I hope he is listening because here arejust two of the many water planning strategies that have been not only developed but also implementedin my part of the world.

The first of these is the $22 million Gattonvale off-stream storage that was commissioned inDecember of last year. This 5,200 megalitre capacity storage is operational. I can report that it isincreasing the reliability of water supplies to the town of Collinsville, a local coalmine and the power


station. The storage was built by the government owned water supplier SunWater to take advantage ofnatural river flows in the Bowen River. With the Gattonvale off-stream storage in place SunWater hasbeen able to reduce the demand on Eungella Dam, which supplies Bowen Basin mines as well asresidential and industrial users in Collinsville.

I am advised that since the off-stream storage has been operational it has stored water that wouldhave previously required four releases of water from the Eungella Dam to the Bowen River totallingsome 7,600 megalitres. Eungella Dam is currently storing 18,300 megalitres or 16 per cent of itscapacity. If those four releases had been required its storage may have almost halved by now. Icongratulate the minister and SunWater on this important water initiative in my area. It is making a hugedifference.

The other project I want to mention is the Water for Bowen initiative. SunWater is well advancedon a two-stage feasibility study investigating the viability of transporting water from the Burdekin Riversouth to Bowen. The water minister, Henry Palaszczuk, and I, along with the member for Burdekin,attended the official launch of a campaign to raise $1½ million from foundation customers for thescheme with the money raised to fund a stage 2 study. The government and SunWater have eachcommitted $1½ million towards the study. I am advised that to date almost a quarter of a million dollarsin financial commitments for the second stage investigation has been received. The closing date to signup is 6 July. I urge all those potential water users to take advantage of this offer and get involved andsign up while they can. I am pleased to contribute to this debate. I am pleased to support the minister. Icommend the bill to the House.

Mr HOBBS (Warrego—NPA) (5.04 pm): I am pleased to speak in the debate on the WaterAmendment Bill 2006. While I personally do not have a great objection to having a Water Commission, Ithink that the principle behind where we are today is trying to set up a structure to perhaps firewall thisgovernment from its inadequacies in doing proper planning for water infrastructure, particularly in south-east Queensland. It is a sorry state of affairs when we consider that there have been so manyopportunities available to build water infrastructure in this region over a number of years and thoseopportunities have not been taken up.

We can go back to one that is hard to comprehend. Land was purchased for the Wolffdene Dam.That land was sold by the Goss Labor government. Some members of that government are still herenow. It is hard to comprehend the stupidity of that decision. Be that as it may, it happened. We have tomove on. The government deserves a bit of a caning for that decision. When we consider the amount ofrainfall in that area in the last couple of years that dam, if it had been built, would have had asubstantial amount of water in it. We should cast our minds back to that time when the CoolangattaAirport was completely covered in water. It would not surprise me if the weather system that wentthrough at that time would have resulted in a substantial amount of water flowing into that dam had itbeen built.

We need to look at a lot of the other developments that should have gone ahead. The ministermentioned this morning that there were complications in relation to resumptions for the Wivenhoe Dam.There are always going to complications in relation to resumptions. It does matter what the situation is.It is a case of how they are resolved. Dams are generally in valleys. The valleys are usually veryproductive areas. We often find that a lot of the early settlements are in those areas. There is a lot ofheartache in relation to moving people on from those areas. That is a given. The area for the WolffdeneDam was not a really productive area and it would have been an ideal site for a dam. We need to bearthat in mind.

I believe the Water Commission is to be set up because there was some disagreement amongvarious councils. I think that perhaps the Brisbane City Council and the Premier were copping a lot offlak in relation to the water restrictions and who to blame. All they are going to do now is blame theWater Commission for the water restrictions because its main role will be to put in place waterrestrictions or to announce water restrictions when the time comes.

The other thing that I want to talk about is the very slippery and disappointing way that thislegislation came about. There was obviously talk between the council of mayors in relation to what theyare going to do about water management in south-east Queensland. It is accepted that this was goingon for quite some time. I do not really believe that the council of mayors had an opportunity to look at thelegislation when it was put together.

The Local Government Association certainly had no knowledge of it. I was at a local governmentinfrastructure conference at the convention centre when it was basically announced that the nextmorning the Premier was going to have a briefing for the councils involved and the LGAQ so that theycould get an understanding of what was in this particular bill. In fact they did not know what it was about.If it had not been for the director-general of the local government department I would suggest that localgovernments still would not have been involved in this. This is a serious situation. When the governmentis not prepared to consult with the major industry groups, that is the first sign that things are not right andthere is a bit of shonkiness going on.


Right from the start the government has set off on the wrong foot. The Local GovernmentAssociation has signed two protocols with the government. Both of those state that there will be fullconsultation on matters that involve local government, particularly in relation to legislation. In this regardthat did not happen at all. The government has broken that protocol again. It is quite extraordinary howmany times that protocol with local government has been broken. Yet in many instances it has beenlocal government that has put in place this infrastructure in question.

We know that the water board structure is in place. However, local governments play a veryimportant role in relation to the overall water infrastructure, the distribution of water, and the waterstrategy for most regions of Queensland, particularly the south-east area. The government did notconsult with local government on this legislation. Basically, the bill was being printed while thecouncillors were discussing the issue. I see that some amendments will be moved. Of course therewould be some amendments, because the bill was put together hastily. We will find that down the trackwe will need to do a lot of work on some issues.

This legislation affects not just south-east Queensland; it can relate to other regions. Recently, Iattended meetings of central Queensland local governments and north Queensland local governments.I asked those councils whether they requested the creation of this Water Commission. While we are allaware that there are water issues in north and central Queensland, no council had requested thecreation of this Water Commission. Had they been consulted? No.

So the government has introduced legislation that councils did not request and had not beenconsulted on. Will it work for them? Will the model for south-east Queensland, where there are manyurban councils and many more issues, be the same model that will apply to councils in central or northQueensland? The government has adopted a Big Brother attitude of just plonking this model on councilsand saying to them, ‘You have to wear this.’ I do not think that is satisfactory at all.

I will give one good example. The legislation states quite clearly that no MP can be on thecommission. Of course, no MP would be on the commission, anyway. The reason that provision wasinserted was that no elected councillor can be on that commission. It is understandable that in this areathere may be a few egos and a few issues that may cause some problems, but I suggest that it would beessential to put a councillor from central or north Queensland on the commission in that area becausethere are probably only one or two councils involved. I think that it would be ideal to have somebody whoknows something about the issues on the commission. After all, the water storage facility is a localgovernment asset. The government is not so much taking it over; it is managing it. These councils needto know that they will have input into the assets that they own and they have built. Over generationsthese regional councils have built pipelines, dams and pump stations. What is wrong with giving themsome input into their management? I do not see why that should not be the case.

In so many areas across the state our water infrastructure is lacking. In north Queensland wehave seen the ridiculous situation—and I am sure other members have spoken about this—of theconstruction of the pipeline from the Burdekin River out to the Bowen Basin. I think it cost about $300-odd million to build that pipeline, which will deliver a very small amount of water. Yet the government hadthe opportunity to build the Urannah Dam or the Connors River Dam, which in comparison would costprobably half the amount—maybe even less for the Connors River Dam—that it cost to build thatpipeline. At the end of the day about 30 or 40 times more water would have been available. It is justcrazy. There is just no logic to the government’s thinking in terms of the development and managementof water storages.

The plans for those dams have been on the books for quite a long time. When I was minister, I putthem out again and the water infrastructure task force went right through them. That task force identifiedthose areas. Obviously, the government would not necessarily choose the same site, but somewhereclose to that area. It is a matter of negotiation to determine how high the dam is to be built and a roughidea of the cost involved. It is just so frustrating that this process has not been undertaken. Yet membersopposite are saying, ‘You can’t build dams,’ and the minister is saying that it is a blokey thing. You know,hell’s teeth! Suddenly, the government has woken up and has said, ‘Hey, we’ve got to have water.’ Ofcourse, we need water. Yes, we have to be more water efficient. We have to do better with our recycling.We have to re-use the water. We do not support sewage being recycled into drinking water.

Ms Nolan interjected. Mr HOBBS: No, we do not support drinking treated sewage. We do not support sewage to tap for

drinking purposes until the time comes when it is necessary. But while there are plenty of options outthere we do not have to do that.

Mr Shine: You’re going to legislate against that.Mr HOBBS: That is right. We will. It is a crazy proposal. There are plenty of opportunities to use

that water for other purposes. We accept that there is a water shortage in Toowoomba. But that townuses bores to water its parks and gardens. When we asked the mayor, ‘Are you going to use thosebores that water the parks and gardens for your town’s water supply?,’ she said, ‘No.’ We asked, ‘Whyon earth not? Why would you not use that and then use the recycled water for your parks and gardensas a first option?’ She said, ‘No, we are not going to do that.’ That is ridiculous. The whole thing is crazy.


Mr Shine: Howard, you’ve got that wrong. Mr HOBBS: No, that is the truth. She told us that. Ms Nolan: This is a second position. This is a new position, isn’t it, after the—Mr HOBBS: No, we have never changed our position. We have had the same position all the way

through. If the member wants to drink treated sewage, that is her privilege. I would love to see that.Basically, Morris Iemma’s view was that New South Wales was not going to have sewage recycled fordrinking purposes because there had not been enough research undertaken into the matter. We havequite a clear position on this matter. I think a lot more work needs to be done in relation to waterdevelopment.

Towns that I represent such as Chinchilla and Miles—but particularly Chinchilla—regularlyexperience water shortages because the weir cannot supply enough water. That town is looking forother options as well. There is no reason that one day this legislation may be imposed upon them outthere. Some water that is a by-product of drilling gas is available. In Dalby, the water that is brought upthrough drilling by Arrow Energy will come across to a desalination plant. Hopefully, that will work prettywell. That would give the area an additional water supply and help keep the town going.

I understand that there has been some success here in Brisbane with drilling for undergroundwater and also in Toowoomba. That is great, but those supplies are really only a last resort and are top-up opportunities for those areas to get by. I think those aquifers will soon reduce, particularly in Brisbanewith the volume of water that is required. They could end up with salt intrusion and the like, dependingon the depth they go to. There are some issues there.

This Water Commission, once it is set up, will cost local government. The councils did not knowabout the cost. The mayors were quite shocked the other day when the government said, ‘We’ll fund thecommission for the first year and after that, boys and girls, it’s all yours.’ How much money are wetalking about? About $2 million or $2.5 million is what it would cost to run this operation. That is for thecommissioners and staff required for the commission. The councils did not necessarily want acommission. They did not ask for one, but they have been told that this is what it is going to cost them.What would it cost other local authorities in central Queensland or north Queensland? Would it be asimilar structure? We certainly hope it would not be as dear as this. Once again, I ask: was it called for?The answer is no, it was not.

Looking at the central area, Nathan Dam has been talked about for a long time. I dusted off thefiles on that project. One of the disappointing aspects is that we let it go out to tender for privateenterprise to build it. That should never have happened. The department of natural resources shouldhave built the dam. It would have been built by now.

Mr Shine: You were the minister, weren’t you? Mr HOBBS: I was. I started the process. The decision was taken to go out to tender and Sudaw

won the tender eventually. There was going to be a pipeline, a dam and a coalmine all rolled into one.But it has not happened. It has not progressed under this government, either. It has been eight yearsand nothing has happened. Where is it?

Mr Shine: Come on. It’s not our fault. Mr HOBBS: It is.Mr Shine: It’s the federal government. Mr HOBBS: The member is blaming the federal government. The reality is that there is a dam

site and it is a beautiful dam site. A dam is needed. The Surat Basin is a huge area and has potential forthe development of future mining activities. They need a railway line and water. We do not want thesame thing to happen in the Surat Basin as happened in the Bowen Basin. In the Bowen Basin there aremines employing thousands of people overall and within days they were running out of water. Luckilythey got a storm and they got by. But we do not want to go through that. The government should getthings moving. It is so extraordinary that we have to wait until the very last minute before something isdone. I urge the minister to have a good look at the Nathan Dam and try to get things moving.

I understand that there have been a couple of court cases in relation to Nathan Dam. Thegovernment should take them on. The Premier says that he is going to build a dam down the road hereand, despite any environmental consequences and despite the court cases and the challenges, he isgoing to build it. So why can’t he build a dam at Nathan, where everything has been put in place? All hehas to do is start the process. The government is not committed. We do not believe the Premier issincere about building this dam at Gympie. I think it is more of a diversion than anything else.

Mr Shine: You don’t believe that.Mr HOBBS: Yes, I do. In all honesty, I do. I do not think he is sincere about that at all. I do not

think we will see that dam built. We want to build dams but we want to build them in the right places.There are numerous sites that have already been bought. They are not the best sites in the whole world,but this government has sold the best sites.

Time expired.


Mr CHRIS FOLEY (Maryborough—Ind) (5.24 pm): I rise to participate in this debate on the WaterAmendment Bill 2006. Let me say from the outset that I am not anti dams; I am simply anti theTraveston Dam.

Mr Lawlor: That’d be right.Mr CHRIS FOLEY: I take the interjection of the honourable member for Southport, who has the

dubious honour of being in a part of the world where their solution is to have an ‘international wastewater day’ and use up all the water while the rest of south-east Queensland is bone dry.

Mr Lawlor: Are you blaming me for that? Mr CHRIS FOLEY: No. I am just saying that you have the dubious honour of being in that area

where that logic is put on the table. It was said to me this morning that I should simply stop whingeing because the plan for the

Traveston Dam will floodproof Gympie and Maryborough. That is absolutely right. It will, but it will comeat the expense of the downstream section of the Mary River and completely screw it up. A lot of peoplein this parliament may theorise about the Mary River, but let me assure members that I live on the MaryRiver. I fish the Mary River. I wakeboard on it. I also know what happens to fishing after the river floods.The greatest problem I have with this whole plan is that if a 660-megalitre dam is built at Traveston itcould take up to 12 years to fill up and in the meantime the environmental flows to a very important riversystem will be completely cut off.

The Premier challenged me this morning to table reasons, and I will do so tomorrow morning.Obviously, that request took me by surprise because I did not have the paperwork with me. When thereis a south-east Queensland water crisis, the water taken is from the muddy end of the 30 per cent orlower level. Obviously, if we take 30 per cent of water from the top level of a dam, because of the profileof catchment area walls, that water is a lot clearer. Representations made to my office estimate that itcould take up to 12 years to fill this dam. Again, that would devastate the downstream flow.

To illustrate that this is not just a Maryborough problem, a number of days ago I was contacted byone of the most successful businessmen in Hervey Bay who has built a huge industry. He rang me andpleaded with me to oppose this dam to my dying breath because in his opinion—and he is someonewho would know—it would completely decimate the fishing industry in the Great Sandy Strait. This is notjust a Maryborough problem, a Gympie problem or a Hervey Bay problem. This solution is just too shortterm.

I will give an example of what is already happening in the river. I live seven kilometresdownstream from the Mary River barrage. As part of a science project, I took my second eldest daughterout last weekend and we did a 20-kilometre run from the barrage down the river taking salinity samplesevery one kilometre. When we sought to establish the baseline salinity—in other words, the fresh wateron the other side of the barrage—after walking a considerable distance along the river wall, the waterwas so low on the upstream side of the barrage wall that it was impossible to get a freshwater sample.My point is that if the water level is so low now because the Mary River barrage is stopping water flowand cane farmers are irrigating out of that then if a 660-megalitre dam is built we are talking about a veryimportant river system drying up.

Two problems that I see with the Traveston Dam project are that it is a very wide dam andtherefore a fairly shallow dam. There are a number of problems with that. I have spent a lot of timeboating and fishing on Lake Borumba, which is a good example of what I am talking about because thatis a deep dam. But with a shallow dam there are real problems with water temperature and blue-greenalgae and also a lot of problems with evaporation. So to build huge water infrastructure and have thewater polluted by blue-green algae and have real problems with evaporation I think is a majordisadvantage.

The 1994 Goss Labor government report on water supply—and I do not need to go into any detailon this because it has been spoken about in the House ad nauseam—for the Sunshine Coast and MaryRiver said that the Traveston site was considered unsuitable because of high capital costs, theinundation of prime agricultural land and the displacement of rural population. The prime agriculturalland that will be affected is not in my electorate and, therefore, I have no particular axe to grind.However, I think this is a short-term solution. We are talking about some of the best farmland inQueensland, and many more environmental studies need to be undertaken before that land isinundated.

Interestingly, some of the media coverage that I have picked up on has stated that the waterstorage will secure water supply for the south-east corner. That is true. I am not a nimby. If we can find abetter place—

Mr Lawlor: It sounds a bit like it.Mr CHRIS FOLEY: Members can say what they like. Mr Hayward interjected.Mr CHRIS FOLEY: Mr Speaker, I plead for your protection from the unruly members at the back

of the House.


Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lee): Order! I am happy to grant the member for Maryborough myprotection. However, a little earlier in his speech he made a comment that some people might find a littleunparliamentary. I suggest that the member withdraws that comment.

Mr CHRIS FOLEY: I will withdraw that comment. Obviously the state has a problem with waterinfrastructure. There is no doubt about that. The member for Barron River talked about reduced rainfall.I attended Wilston State School and I can remember that every single day we could set our clocks by thesummer storms at 10 am and 3 pm. We would jump in the puddles on the way home. That type ofseasonal rain does not really—

Mr Lawlor interjected. Mr CHRIS FOLEY: Yes, I did. I spent the best four years of my life in grade 7. Whilst building this

dam will secure water storage for south-east Queensland, it will come at great expense. I do not want tosee this parliament set up infrastructure that will cause a major fight between the bush and the city. Ibelieve that this project has the potential to do that.

As the member for Barron River said, a 30 per cent rainfall depletion by the year 2030 is exactlywhy it will take six-tenths of forever to fill the blessed dam in the first place. Because of the reducedrainfall, it could take a very long time to fill the dam. I fail to see how a dam that could take anywherebetween five and 12 years to build and fill will help when water supply is in absolute crisis mode now.

Many people have responded to this proposal and, as the member for Maryborough, my job is toreflect the views of my community. Certainly a lot of things have been said about the dam. The MaryRiver is a unique river system. I live on the river, I love the river and I am very passionate aboutprotecting the river whenever I can.

The Mary River runs for 310 kilometres from Maleny, through the Great Sandy Strait west ofFraser Island through Gympie, Maryborough and popular camping areas such as at Conondale, throughthe shires of Caboolture, Caloundra, Kilcoy, Maroochy, Noosa, Cooloola, Kilkivan, Woocoo, Tiaro,Maryborough and Biggenden, and winds up at Hervey Bay. The Mary River is also the home of theendemic Mary River cod, which is an endangered species, and the vulnerable Mary River tortoise. It isalso home to several other endangered, threatened and vulnerable species including the Australianlungfish. Any student of environmental issues would know that the only river systems that the lungfishreally thrives in are the Mary and the Burnett. Those rivers should be protected.

The Mary River is an icon of the tourism and recreational fishing industries, as reflected in thework that the environment minister has done on the Great Sandy Marine Park, although I doacknowledge that it is not always the case that everyone is in favour of such a proposal. The river bringsa lot of visitors to our area, and I cannot emphasise strongly enough how concerned I am about thedown-river effects of damming and weiring the river.

The negative environmental impacts for the Mary River catchment and the Great Sandy WorldHeritage area generally are significant and unacceptable. Large-scale water infrastructure will not onlypermanently affect the Mary River catchment but also degrade the fisheries in the Great Sandy WorldHeritage area.

A lot of people have come to me to raise issues of riparian riverbank erosion on the Mary River. Inthe middle reaches of the river that is a significant problem, especially in the pineapple and sugarcaneareas. In the lower catchment flooding is an important issue, with associated erosion production lossesand stream bank failures. Productivity decline is widespread in cultivated areas due to a breakdown insoil structure, nutrient decline, soil acidity and the invasion of a large range of broadleafed weeds.

Salinity is a problem in the middle to lower reaches of the Mary River, most commonly caused bythe clearing of forest areas. Whilst this government has worked very hard to protect forestry, salinityproblems abound when a river is dammed but no allowance is made for the normal environmentalfreshwater flows. That causes an increase in salinity which mucks up the balance of the river.

The upper reaches of the river are in a relatively natural state, which degenerates dramatically inthe lower reaches as land uses change to grazing and agriculture. The river becomes deeply incisedwith little riparian vegetation, high turbidity and less diversity of flora and fauna species within thestream. Where I go wakeboarding on the Mary River, whole chunks of the riverbank are eroded up to 20to 30 feet high. That is a real problem with the river downstream.

I have a great deal of sympathy for the minister. This is a very difficult thing to do. Like I said at theoutset of my speech today, I am not opposed to dams but I am opposed to the Traveston Dam.

I wish to quote a couple of interesting statistics. I have had significant discussions withenvironment minister Desley Boyle regarding a private member’s bill that I am working on at themoment. We affectionately call it the ‘piddle bill’, as it relates to urinals. One fill-up-and-flush urinal atKenmore High School—and members should listen carefully if they care about these particular issues—used 272,000 litres of fresh drinking water per fortnight. That was reduced to 4,000 litres per fortnight bythe installation of a motion sensor system. The private member’s bill that I will bring to the House willmandate the use of either motion sensor or manual flush systems.


Let us crunch numbers a little. The member for Kallangur and I were discussing this a little earlier.If one urinal can save six million litres of fresh water per year and this is a 660-megalitre dam, thatequates to 110 urinals being changed from fill-up-and-flush to motion sensor or manual flush. Thatwould save an amount of water that is equivalent to the total storage capacity of this dam. The debate isnot just about building dam infrastructure; it is about the proper use of water. Let me say it again so it isvery clear: if 110 fill-up-and-flush urinals were changed to motion sensor urinals, we would save thesame amount of water as the total water capacity storage of this dam. If members do not believe me,they can grab a calculator and work it out.

The Mary River is a very unique river system with remnant rainforest along the catchmentstreams, rare and endangered animals such as the Mary River cod and numerous known habitat siteswithin the proposed dam location that link other populations such as the Mary River tortoise, which is theonly species of that genus in the world and is known to occur from Tiaro to Imbil. Building a dam willhave a definite effect on that tortoise, the lungfish, platypus, and the list goes on and on. That is aheritage that our children should share. I do not want to see a fight between the city and the bush.However, I believe that that is what this dam proposal will usher in.

Hon. KW HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) (5.38 pm): In rising to participate in the debate on theWater Amendment Bill 2006 I would like to address the matter of future cost sharing for major regionalinfrastructure facilities and the associated matter of regional water pricing.

The bill establishes a new body, the Queensland Water Commission, which will have a key role.That key role is the essential task of future planning for water security in Queensland with priorityattention to the state’s major population growth region and, indeed, the fastest growing urban region inAustralia, south-east Queensland.

The bill inserts a new chapter 2A into the Water Act 2000, the main purpose of which is to ensurethe delivery of a sustainable and secure water supply and demand management for south-eastQueensland and subsequently, as other speakers have noted, for other key regions such as centralQueensland with its new mining developments and the continued industrial growth in Gladstone andaround Stanwell.

The Queensland Water Commission will advise the Minister for Natural Resources, Mines andWater on matters relating to water supply and demand management and the delivery of desired levels ofservice objectives for water supplied to the designated regions. Essentially the commission will come upwith regional water security options for the minister to consider and the minister in turn will respond tothe commissioner’s recommendations with a formal regional water security program which thecommission will then implement.

The Premier identified the main reason why we need to have this legislation for more effectivewater planning and supply and demand management when he pointed out in his second readingspeech that the current arrangements in south-east Queensland are particularly complex with 19 waterstorages owned by 12 different bodies. No one single body has overall responsibility for water planningto ensure that future supply meets the ever-increasing demand and the challenges—which have beenpointed out by earlier speakers—of climate change. The Premier indicated very clearly in his secondreading speech that the new Queensland Water Commission will not be an infrastructure provider ordam builder in its own right. The commission, however, will become involved in assessing where andwhen new infrastructure is required and then identifying possible proponents, including potential newprivate sector investors.

Also the commission, in conjunction with the Coordinator-General, will be able to facilitate thedelivery of new infrastructure projects by slashing through any unnecessary red tape and ensuringprompt consideration of new infrastructure proposals by relevant state agencies. It will also be able tocoordinate the necessary feasibility studies and generally smooth the way for the timely delivery ofmajor water projects. It is pleasing to note that the government has, in fact, kicked off the process foraugmentation of water supplies in south-east Queensland with the recent announcement of two majornew dams, one in the Logan River catchment in the south and the other in the Mary River catchment inthe north. Opposition members have indicated that they support this bill but they have arguedspecifically against these dam proposals, in particular the Mary River proposal, expressing issues inrelation to environmental matters or whatever else they can find. The problem that they have is that theycannot, in this political climate, be seen to be opposing dams. The speakers who have spoken so far willsimply not commit to these major dams.

Mr Lawlor: They are each-way punters.Mr HAYWARD: Absolutely. The question is: do they support dams? They say, ‘We are not sure

about that, but what we do know is we do not support these dams. We will support another dam. If it was10 feet further up the river or 10 feet further down the river, that would make it different.’ The reality is, ofcourse, that the political difficulty that the opposition has in this case is that it does not know how toeffectively oppose the dam proposals that have come forward. It simply puts forward mealy-mouthedtalk about problems that could arise and whether or not people have had enough consultation ingeneral. It does not want to be seen to be supporting these specific proposals.


These dams have a good and strategic geographic spread to reduce dependence on one sourcebecause the associated pipe links will interconnect the three major subregions of south-eastQueensland, namely, the area to the south of the Brisbane metropolitan area, including the Gold Coastand its hinterland, the Brisbane metropolitan area itself and the area to the north, including the SunshineCoast and its hinterland.

South-east Queensland is now one interconnected region, especially in terms of its urban growthand the pressing need to plan for that growth, including, of course, future water needs. It is just notsensible for the water needs of Brisbane to be handled in isolation to those of Ipswich, Logan, the GoldCoast and Sunshine Coast or other council areas. We now have a seamless road and rail transportnetwork in south-east Queensland, a seamless electricity network, so logically we need a seamlesswater supply network as well. The commission will assist in planning for this process which is eminentlymore sensible than having each local government and each water service provider doing its own thing inan uncoordinated manner.

Longer term regional interest must take precedence over short term parochial interests. That iswhat we are hearing this afternoon in this debate from people on the other side. They are absolutelyfocused on the short term parochial interests. The member for Southport spoke about the fear that theNational Party has because his favourite newspaper, Queensland Country Life, which is the bible for theNational Party, has been calling for more and more dams.

Mr Chris Foley: He could be the editor. Mr HAYWARD: He could be the editor. The difficulty it has is that it must not be seen to be

opposing dams. The argument it is trying to present now is that it does not oppose dams; it just opposesthese dams.

If we talk of future water supply we must talk of future water pricing. The pricing of water at retaillevel—that is, to households in urban areas—is, for better or worse, a traditional responsibility of thelocal city, town and shire councils. In fact, Queensland’s Local Government Act 1993 makes that clear.That is not going to change, because none of the local governments in south-east Queensland are likelyto give up ownership and control of their very profitable retail water businesses.

However, we need to address the pricing of water at what might be called the wholesale level—that is, bulk water coming from the dams and treatment plants. Obviously the pricing of water at thewholesale level is a crucial element in what happens further down the water supply system. Anyincreases in that level are almost certainly going to be passed on to major industrial users and tohouseholds at the retail level unless councils are prepared to slash the profit margins of their own waterbusinesses which I would think is very unlikely.

With all of the new water infrastructure that is needed in south-east Queensland, cost recovery isgoing to be a crucial element in the determination of future water prices. The best place to achieveeffective cost recovery for regionally necessary water assets is at the point where the bulk treated waterenters the distribution network owned by the various local governments. If we have a clearly definedregion, which we do have in south-east Queensland, and a set of regional interconnected water supplyassets, which is what we will have in the future, it stands to reason that we should have a common oraveraged—some might say a pooled—price for that water, at least at the point where it leaves the majorregional supply network to enter the local distribution network.

The Beattie government has encouraged south-east Queensland councils to look at setting up aregional bulk water supply body that could operate a central pooling operation for bulk water in theregion, taking it from different sources and selling it on to major industrial users such as power stationsand the councils. I think this is a sensible idea. The body could either be a pool operator that does notown the actual assets—like a broker, if you like—or it could be an owner and operator of the majorsupply and treatment assets, depending on what the councils can agree to. Either way, this wouldfacilitate price averaging for bulk water across the south-east region. It stands to reason that the cost ofregional water assets, both the capital costs and the operating costs, needs to be spread across all thebeneficiaries in the region and that the population base will in turn be enlarged by the inevitable futureinterconnection between the various supply systems.

If we do not have region-wide bulk water pricing, the alternative would be a very complicatedpricing system that would have to try to achieve cost recovery targets by relating individual beneficiariesto individual supply sources so there would inevitably be different bulk water prices right across theregion. That, I think, would defeat the whole concept of regional water management. If we are to havesensible regional outcomes in water as much as anything else we need to have regional answers toregional issues. Otherwise, the costs of essential new regional infrastructure will fall far too heavily onsome councils and hence their ratepayers and local businesses, and too lightly on others.

I make the observation that if there is to be a regional water supply body it should have aneffective monopoly of bulk water supply. Where there is a monopoly or the potential for one, it followsthat there has to be a proper process of oversight of that body’s pricing activities in the public interest.


There are of course many other aspects to the water situation in south-east Queensland andindeed elsewhere in the state that, as I said before, other honourable members have touched upon orwill touch upon, I am sure, in their contributions to this debate. What I have tried to do is pass on someobservations on two aspects—the need for additional water infrastructure to guarantee future watersecurity and the need to seriously consider regional pricing outcomes at least for bulk treated water.

This bill will facilitate something that is just plain common sense when it comes to something asvital as water: the need for coordinated regional planning and the implementation of regional outcomesto address regional issues firstly in south-east Queensland and then progressively elsewhere. Icommend the bill to the House.

Mr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (5.51 pm): The Water Amendment Bill is an extremelyimportant bill. It is a bill which will put in place the Queensland Water Commission. Whilst we aresupporting this bill, we are disappointed because when the Water Commission was mooted it looked likeit was going to be something of substance—something that would encompass south-east Queenslandand pull people together so that new issues that have arisen in water could be dealt with in acomprehensive way without having cross-border issues and problems.

With climate change and the different patterns of rainfall, the time has come to have a differentapproach to water and to be able to share water around. I come from a city of almost 100,000 people ontop of the Great Dividing Range 2,000 feet up, and our water comes from either side of that watershedbut down towards the bottom of it. We have to lift our water 400 metres vertically and then pump it some50 metres to the city, so I am well aware of the issues facing a city or a population that has to get itswater from outside the city area from other shires or from other areas of the state.

Likewise, most of Brisbane’s water—95 per cent of it—comes from about 140 kilometres to thenorth-west, from two dams located almost side by side on the same stream in the same catchment area.What is needed for Brisbane is a source of supply. That is why the Wyaralong Dam has been looked atand why the government has now come up with another suggestion.

Looking at it in practical terms, we have to look at where the catchment is and where the rainfallis. Rainfall is probably the most important thing. Where is the rainfall in south-east Queensland? Mostlyit is in the Springbrook area, on top of the hills behind the Gold Coast, along the McPherson Range thatruns east to west across the state border. The border was drawn based on the watershed. What runssouth is New South Wales; what runs north is Queensland. A lot of our rainfall forms on the hinterland ofthe Sunshine Coast in places of high rainfall like Maleny.

We thought this Water Commission had some real potential. That is why we are voting for the bill.However, as our shadow minister has pointed out, we are disappointed because we feel the commissionis nothing more than an advisory body. On reading the bill, it is clear that it is an advisory body that willfacilitate this and facilitate that. What does that mean? Is it just going to talk to people? What is it reallygoing to do? The only thing of substance it appears that it will do is impose water restrictions on variousshires and councils. Other than that, it is basically an advisory body.

The reason for the introduction of this bill and, more directly, the sudden announcement of twodams that were put aside some 12 years ago as not being viable is panic and the need to play catch-upfootball by this government. It has been exposed—as it was exposed in the health debacle, as it wasexposed with the department of families, as it was exposed with the electrical problems that we had.Once again it has panicked and it has raced out to make these big announcements to suddenly make itlook like it is doing something when we have had eight years of absolute inaction.

In fact, the opposition has been criticised for continually bringing up the need for dams. Let ushave none of this rubbish that the opposition is opposed to dams. We are the ones who have beenpromoting them. If we do not want restrictions, if we want recycling and all of those other things, wecannot do it with fresh air. We have to do it with water. We have to build dams. Even if there is climatechange, dams are there to last eight, 10 or 12 years. They need to be built in places where there is aproper structure that can take the wall. Have a look at the Burdekin Dam. It has a huge catchment, ahuge rainfall and an absolutely perfect place in which to put the wall. It can also be extended. That is anexample of a good dam. The fact that water is being transferred from there to Townsville makes senseand I agree with it.

In our case, in Toowoomba we need water from other areas. When this commission was firstmooted, I felt it could smooth the way for sensible decisions to give Toowoomba just a smidgin of waterfrom some of the catchments below the range, where there is a higher rainfall, to solve the particularissues that we are facing. I will come to that issue shortly.

With regard to the Mary River Dam, other speakers have talked about how that was looked at anddiscarded back in 1992 or 1994. On the night that that announcement was made I did not sleep becausemy wife, my kids and I had a farm there—and it would be about 30 feet under—at a place calledGoomong Pocket, about two kilometres upstream from Traveston. To think of the cubbyhouse which thekids built and where we lived being inundated with water was a dreadful thought. The thought wentthrough my mind: what happens to those people who live there? What happens to their future? How are


they going to feel about this sudden, knee-jerk decision by the government? If it had been put in placeand talked about for years, if environmental and social impact statements had been carried out, it mightbe different. But the government is proposing just six weeks to look at something like this.

The dam is going to cost $2.5 billion. I hope the government remembers what I said. There are900 properties in the area. Very few, if any, will be under $1 million. This Noosa hinterland country isworth $10,000 an acre. Have a look at the Country Life and see the prices of little places there. Thereare dairy farms milking 1,500 cows with big rotary dairies on them. Goodness knows what they aregoing to be worth. Multiply those 900 properties by so many millions of dollars, which is the average ofeach property, and you will soon see that the estimate of $1.5 billion to $1.6 billion for the purchase ofthose properties is well and truly spot-on and might even be a little short.

That is the price of the land. Then there is the price of the dam. The government will never build adam across Traveston. It is wide. It is not a true dam site. It is sandy. There is some 60 feet or more ofsand. It will be a big, shallow dam that will take a lot of properties. It will go out over the Bruce Highwayto where you turn off to go to Imbil. It will go right up through Federal and goodness knows what otherplaces. They are talking about putting a dyke around Kandanga, because Kandanga Creek will rise andflood the bowls club and all through that area. When we look at the economic capacity of that area,20 per cent of Queensland’s dairy production will go. It is the best dairy land in the state, with theirrigation that it has and the river flats there.

Let us look at an alternative location for this dam. We all agree that there has to be a dam. Whatdisturbed me when listening to the debate on this issue on the radio one evening last week was that thePremier had discussions with the member for Nicklin and the member for Glass House. Obviously thereis another site further upstream but for political reasons it has been canned. Upstream they have a highrainfall and probably better dam sites. There is also the Borumba Dam, which can be raised. That is ona different catchment altogether on Yabba Creek. It is another catchment altogether but it could beraised. A dam site has been proposed on the Mary River further upstream. In a political deal the Premierhas ruled that out—and probably the minister—with the member for Nicklin and the member for GlassHouse. So they are going to impose this dam further down—a shallow dam—on all those people wholive and produce in that highly productive, vast area that the Traveston wall will back up.

Dams are important to us. We think that they have to be economical. They have to be where thereis high rainfall. They have to be where there is a good catchment and they have to be where a gooddam wall can be built in order to have an efficient dam. There is another thing about the dam that thePremier has alluded to right from the start. There was a little bit of spin put out that it was being built forGympie and the Sunshine Coast. However, we all know that it is for Brisbane. The Premier has said thatand he has said that it is for Lake Wivenhoe. They are going to take one of two routes. They are going topump the water over that ridge at the back of Maleny so that it runs into the Stanley system at the backof Woodford and the Beerwah Range where it runs down to the Stanley and then into the Somerset andfrom Somerset into Wivenhoe. The other option is they will go down the coast and hook into one of thesystems further down there. Add that cost to the $1.5 billion or more for the land and the $500 million ormore it will cost to build a dam there and we see that it is going to be a very expensive dam to build—thepumping system, the size of the pipeline, the pump stations required, the high lift to get over that ridge oreven to pump it over the various ridges down the coast. The cost of this dam will be absolutely massive.However, a better dam site was most probably ruled out politically by the Premier’s discussion with themember for Nicklin and the member for Glass House.

The other thing that really annoyed me when I heard all these announcements was the plight ofToowoomba. Because the Premier is facing criticism for having done nothing for eight years and beinganti-dams, all of a sudden the government goes to this big proposal that will affect so many people andone of the best farming areas of Queensland. As I said, it is going to cost about $2.5 million forresumptions for the dams, the pipelines, the pump stations, the lift gear and so forth in order to ship thatwater down towards Lake Wivenhoe and the Brisbane system. When it came to Toowoomba, which sitson top of the range and which needs only 5,000 megalitres a year extra on top of what we have now,and looking at the supplementary systems that could provide that to Toowoomba plus some growth, theBeattie government has said no to every single option. It has said no, no, no to everything that hascome up, whether it is the 30,000 megalitres sustainable yield for Norwin underground suppliers;whether it is a system of managed weirs to catch the stormwater on Gowrie Creek at the back of thebacon factory where there are steep banks and a very short pump to Cooby Dam; whether it has beenusing the recycled water of Toowoomba for industrial purposes, parkland and sports field irrigation;whether it has been to use a smidgin of water from the Wivenhoe system or catchment and transferringthat water from Wivenhoe to Crestbrook Dam where the infrastructure is already in existence to take it toToowoomba; whether it is taking it along the existing pipeline that goes to Gatton and then on to Withcottand increasing the diameter of those pipes at the foot of the range and lifting it up to the existingreservoir at Picnic Point—that is treated water that goes through Gatton—or whether it be by putting theEmu Creek Dam in place, which is in the catchment of the Wivenhoe, so that Toowoomba can havesome water out of that dam and the balance could go down to the Wivenhoe.


Bear in mind that the Wivenhoe Dam was built for two purposes: as a flood buffer for Brisbaneand secondly to provide extra storage. The Wivenhoe Dam filled to the top will hold 2.2 millionmegalitres. It is only filled to one million megalitres. It is only filled to 48 per cent of its capacity. Thebalance is a vacuum that is kept there to protect Brisbane from any future floods of the ilk of the 1974flood. If a dam was built on Emu Creek and if the government is so concerned not to lift Wivenhoe a littlebit—and that would be a cheap way of holding extra water when it does rain—Emu Creek would hold130,000 megalitres. It could be shared between Brisbane and Toowoomba, and that 130,000 megalitreswould be additional to the one million megalitres that is held in Wivenhoe because that is the maximumthey let it hold. That certainly was an option for us at Toowoomba.

The other option, of course, has been the coal seam methane water, which is progressing well forChinchilla and Dalby. Both of those towns are going to take in the order of 1,000 megalitres of water. Ihave had a look at those mining operations. There is massive potential through that area and further outprobably for hundreds of years. They bring the gas up. It is 50 per cent gas and 50 per cent water. It haswhat could be described as a relatively low salt content varying, depending on the particular well, from800 to 3,000 parts per million. That water is quite suitable for cows, trees and certain crops. Withreverse osmosis they are going to use 1,000 megalitres at Chinchilla and a similar amount at Dalby.That water could certainly be pumped across to Oakey, for example, which takes a large amount ofwater from Toowoomba and some of the surrounding areas on that lower altitude to relieve the burdenon Toowoomba—and ultimately even for Toowoomba. Instead, our city is torn apart and ripped asunderby referendum and the debate about recycled water and whether it should go into our drinking system.No-one else around Australia wants to do it. On the radio yesterday morning Premier Iemma said no toa recycled system that they are introducing in the north-western suburbs of Sydney. It was a quiteemphatic no. Because of health issues they will not be putting that into the drinking supply. PremierBeattie has said on TV here in Queensland that Brisbane will not be drinking recycled water. Just thismorning we saw the minister sidestep the question when he was asked whether he agreed withBrisbane drinking recycled water or whether he agreed with the comments of Premier Iemma. Hedodged the question. Normally he speaks for the full three minutes. I think he spoke for about 15seconds on that one and sat down.

That is the situation in which we are in Toowoomba. We see the government prepared to spend$2.5 billion and more on a sudden fix because it sees political problems. It absolutely desertsToowoomba on the top of the range and leaves us to recycle the water into the drinking system—and allthis to ensure that Brisbane does not have to do the same.

I want to say a few words tonight about tank water. I think it is a shame to all sides of politics andto all levels of government that over the years the use of tank water has not been what it should have. Ifhonourable members visit some shires today they will find that there are all sorts of regulationsregarding what tank water cannot be used for. In some places it can only be hooked into toilets. It caneven be banned from showers and so forth. Just over the border of that shire—and it might be just overa couple of hundred metres into a rural area—tank water might be what people use for everything. Intime, we should gain a bit of common sense. I would like to see the Local Government Association ofQueensland look at this matter. Tank water should be used for almost everything in the house. If peoplewant to be ultra careful and if they want to cover themselves they should not hook it into the drinkingwater in the kitchen. It should be allowed to be used in showers, toilets and washing machines.

Look at the formula for rainfall. One of the problems we have is that, even though we still get mostof the rainfall and we are still getting some up around the dams—have a look at Brisbane’s rainfall; it isprobably 32 inches or something in that order—it is not coming in one heavy drop of eight, nine or 10inches that we get with cyclones running into creeks or streams. However, when that rain falls on a tinroof, it goes into the tank; we can catch 100 per cent of that rain. There are new modern systems of 10or 20 litre take-offs that take the first flush off the roof and, via a T-piece in the downpipe, runs off to a potplant through a tube. So the first flush does not go into the tank and people can save so much water.Honourable members can work out the figures. If, say, 100 millimetres falls on a square metre of roof,looking at the total rainfall for an area they will find that most houses would fill a 10,000-gallon tank anumber of times per year.

Looking at my own city of Toowoomba, before 1947 people lived on tank and bore water. We didnot get a dam until 1947. People lived on tank water and they were mostly little galvanised iron watertanks, not the big moulded plastic ones that can be purchased now that do not let algae in because theykeep the light out. People can easily have two 5,000-gallon tanks. With modern house building systems,water can be stored under patios or in inground tanks. I think it is essential. As part of the housingindustry’s awards each year, it should have an award for the best collection and distribution system ofwater. The amount of water that runs off a city is equivalent to what could be held in a large dam. Wecould easily catch that.

It is not the answer but is part of the answer. It is a big part of the answer for the simple reasonthat the rainfall that falls around our dams—the 24 inches or 28 inches or 20 inches in a low year thatfalls around the Kilcoy area at the back of Somerset and Wivenhoe—does not run because the groundis dry. It fills up the cracks and soaks in. If it hits a tin roof it will run and we can catch 100 per cent of it.


We have to look at different pricing mechanisms in the future. Water is a valuable resource. Wemust always consider the elderly and those who have difficulty in paying. We have to look at restrictions.I think the public are now aware that restrictions should come in earlier and that water is not somethingthat we can use with gay abandon like we used to. We have to look at dams. We are a firm believer indams. They are a primary source of water for those places that have difficulty in catching water such asunits and so forth. Every household has it as a backup supply. We have to have dams. We can only getwater from either a dam or underground.

We are also looking at the potential of treating sea water and bringing it to a purified state. Wehave to have a look at all of those things. We are supporting the Water Commission but I think we are alldisappointed at its lack of strength. It is basically an advisory body. We have exposed the Beattie moveon the Mary River Dam for what it is. It is time that every single community around Queensland andcouncils got fair dinkum about having tanks which can supply in many instances between 50 and 80 or90 per cent of people’s water. What a difference that would make. It would make us all the more waterwise and careful with what we are doing.

Mrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (6.11 pm): I rise to speak in support of the WaterAmendment Bill 2006. The passage of this bill and the formation of the Queensland Water Commissionwill address a number of deficiencies in the current water planning regime in south-east Queensland.The development of this legislation followed a review of the institutional arrangements for water insouth-east Queensland started in August last year. That review culminated in a decision to establish awater planning authority for the region which was announced jointly by the Premier, the minister forwater and the mayors of south-east Queensland.

The commission provides the means to address many problems that exist with the current waterplanning model for south-east Queensland. The shadow minister acknowledged this when he told theCourier-Mail that the commission was a good idea. The establishment of the commission represents anew direction for water planning in south-east Queensland. The commission will have statutoryresponsibility for water supply and security planning, implementation and compliance. The SEQRegional Plan highlighted the need for a review of institutional arrangements for water supply in south-east Queensland.

While population pressures are a key driver, the drought has highlighted many problems with theexisting arrangements. In response the government initiated a review of institutional arrangements forurban and related rural water supply in south-east Queensland. The review was led by the state inpartnership with local governments and other water suppliers. It was overseen by a steering committeethat is chaired jointly by the Coordinator-General and the director-general of the Department of NaturalResources, Mines and Water.

The review examined a package of reforms relating to planning for water security, both supplyand demand, water sharing and entitlements, cost sharing, pricing and economic regulation and assetownership and integration. Because these four elements are related, work on each of these progressedsimultaneously. However, it was agreed that priority needs to be given to fixing the planning model toaddress the systemic weakness inherent in the current model. The steering committee considered theissues around the planning model for some months, documenting problems with the currentarrangements and considering options for reform. The Water Amendment Bill 2006 establishes thatplanning authority in the form of the Queensland Water Commission.

So what are the problems with the current arrangements and how can the commission addressthese? As clearly identified by the Premier in his second reading speech, current institutionalarrangements for water supply and distribution in south-east Queensland are particularly complex. Forexample, there are 19 water storages owned by 12 different entities. There is also multiple ownership ofwater treatment plants, distribution pipelines, reservoirs and waste water treatment plants. Each localgovernment has its own retail water supply business and some of these make a lot of money for theparent councils so they are understandably unwilling to consider handing over control of thesebusinesses to any central body.

However, the problem is that there is no one entity clearly accountable for ensuring regional watersupply security across south-east Queensland. It is now one clearly identified urban region—the fastestgrowing one in Australia, in fact. It has by far the most complicated water institutional arrangements ofany metropolitan area in this country. This leads to uncertainty regarding who is responsible fordeveloping new water infrastructure, particularly infrastructure that has a regional impact—that is,facilities that supply more than one concise local government area.

The current planning model is consensus based and relies upon the agreement and commitmentof industry participants, including up to 18 councils and other infrastructure owners such as SunWaterand South East Queensland Water Corporation Ltd, or SEQWater as it is usually known. Notsurprisingly, local government water providers focus on servicing population and growth within theirlocal government area so there is no entity to take a regional approach and make decisions based onthe best interests of the region.


The commission will address the deficiencies that are present in the current planning model byintroducing a regional approach to water planning in south-east Queensland. While consultation willcontinue, the current reliance on consensus will be replaced with a model where decisions are made bythe government following the receipt of independent, expert based advice from the commission.

A clear example of the benefits that will be achieved as a result of the commission’sestablishment relates to the finalisation and implementation of the South East Queensland RegionalWater Supply Strategy. Currently, completion and implementation of the strategy depends uponagreement between water industry stakeholders, including 18 local governments, SEQWater andSunWater. Once established the commission will provide a single vehicle for completion andimplementation of the strategy, in consultation with stakeholders, without depending on unanimousstakeholder agreement.

Another issue is the need for the coordination of regional bulk water supply. The government hasalso taken the initiative to ask the local governments, SunWater and SEQWater to consider newinstitutional arrangements in the state’s south east. Again, the Premier made it clear in his secondreading speech that the government is not interested in taking over local government owned waterassets. What is necessary, at least in the first instance, is some sort of regional operational entity thatcan coordinate the supply of water from various sources across the region and on the other hand canthen negotiate onward supply arrangements to the local government water businesses and to bigbusinesses such as the power stations. It does not have to be a new government owned body. Indeed itwould probably be better if it were not a new statutory authority. We already have a body that has a keyrole to play in water supply in south-east Queensland, SEQWater, which owns the Wivenhoe, Somersetand North Pine dams. Perhaps SEQWater or a subsidiary of it could be the regional operating entity.

It is my understanding that the south-east Queensland council of mayors is developing a proposalto put before the government with regard to a regional operating entity. I would encourage the ministerto give full consideration to the proposal from the council of mayors. If the proposal has already beenreceived and considered in government, the minister may wish to advise his views upon it.

The Queensland government is committed to achieving regional water supply security in thesouth-east Queensland region. The establishment of the commission is a vital step towards this goal.Further reform of institutional arrangements will be an essential further step. The Premier and theMinister for Natural Resources, Mines and Water are to be commended on their far-sighted approachevidenced not only by this legislation but also by the major water infrastructure announcements alreadymade.

The government’s partnership with local councils and water service providers to develop anddeliver the South East Queensland Regional Water Supply Strategy is very important. The governmentand local councils have a shared concern for the region’s water security. Significantly, the strategyhighlights the shared commitment to addressing these issues comprehensively and cooperatively. I notethe foreword of the Premier, the minister and the Brisbane Lord Mayor, Campbell Newman, for thestrategy’s stage 2 interim report released in January. The foreword states—Our partnership approach is essential. All of us have a part to play—from those who are passionate about water conservation, tothe consumer, and those who supply water to our homes and businesses. The Queensland Government provides the framework necessary to manage our water resources, establish water supplies andsupport the implementation of innovations. Concurrently, water service providers such as SEQWater, SunWater, AquaGen and local governments will have a critical role inensuring that water needs are equitably met through the region, irrespective of jurisdictional boundaries. With this in mind, the Stage Two Interim Report is a significant step towards achieving coordinated and sustained growth.Importantly, it addresses short and medium-term water supply issues, which are essential for enabling our region to prosper.

I commend the bill and the government’s effort to achieve greater water security to the House. Mr RICKUSS (Lockyer—NPA) (6.19 pm): I rise to speak to the Water Amendment Bill 2006. It is

unfortunate that this government keeps floundering around like one of the poor old lungfish in the MaryRiver. I have in my hand a document that I would like to table. It is titled Queensland waterways and itwas released in December 2001. It is the regional operating plan that was going to be put in place forthe Mary River. I am sure the minister would be kind enough to advise me that that regional operatingplan has still not been put in place. This document is dated 6 December 2001. That just goes to showthat there is no real plan in this state.

The government talks about 19 entities in south-east Queensland owning 12 facilities. If we takeout the number operated by SEQWater, that reduces the number dramatically. SEQWater is made up of17 of those entities. SEQWater has managed the water for a while. This bill places another body overthe top of that structure. All that does is confuse the issue.

The government has announced the construction of two dams and the creation of this body. Itreally does not understand the issues relating to water. This bill is not going to help our water suppliesone bit. It is not going to help the water supply for south-east Queensland; it is all about winning the nextelection in the next six months.


I have here a copy of the draft response to the options paper prepared for the south-eastQueensland mayors. In that document reference is made to DOPs and DOOPs—a distributionoperating purchaser and a distribution operating and owner purchaser. They are operating plans for thiswater. This response really does not make a lot of sense.

I received a briefing on this water bill. The government really does not know where this WaterCommission is going to go or how it is going to be operated. I honestly believe that SEQWater was thefacility to manage our water. It is already in place. We are now putting in another level of bureaucratsthat to me are only going to hinder the situation. By the time this process is complete, instead of having19 entities we are going to have 20 or 21 entities with the south-east Queensland water users receivingno real benefit.

Mr McARDLE (Caloundra—Lib) (6.22 pm): I rise to make a short address to the WaterAmendment Bill. I start by making the observation that any government that is responsible makesproposals for the development and growth of the region and the people that it governs. By doing so, itputs in place plans, amendments, strategies and goals that over a lengthy period will meet the needs ofa growing region.

But in this state we do not have a government that has the capacity to understand the need forplanning. We do not have a government that understands the capacity to look into the future andascertain what needs to be achieved and then put down on paper exactly how it is going to achieve it. Infact, we have a government that shows absolutely no understanding of the concept of responsibility forthe care of people in this state. In fact, I can remember, when the government handed down its 2005-06budget in June last year, making a clear statement that it had gained a surplus of $4 billion. Thegovernment made much of that figure to the media and about how it had met the ongoing costs of theQueensland public for many years to come by planning appropriately.

Of course, we now find that 12 months down the track that statement was far from the truth. Infact, we have found that the government has had to spend billions of dollars trying to undo the damagethat it did in past years and, more importantly, plan for the future. Unfortunately, the government hasplanned for the future in a bandaid manner. That has meant quick, hasty, ill-considered, inappropriateplans being put on paper and pushed out into the media and to the public, not for the reason that thegovernment is going to solve the problems but to attempt to save its political hide. This government haslurched from one crisis to another. The people of Queensland are quite well aware of that fact.

The bill removes power from local governments and puts the control of one resource in this stateinto state government hands. Up until recently, water provision had been the province of localgovernments. But this government had found itself in such political hot water that it had to move toensure it controlled the resource that it had failed to adequately provide for in the foreseeable anddistant future.

In my opinion, the centralisation of power in this state government’s hands of one more resourceis one more element to establish the fact that it simply is not planning for the future. The WaterAmendment Bill is not going to achieve significant gains for this state. It does not do anything thatDNRMW does not do. It simply places a further strata of bureaucracy, a further strata of governmentintervention, in a process that is not needed.

In my opinion, the government’s insistence on controlling water clearly demonstrates its inabilityto consult with the people of Queensland and learn what they need and, more particularly, what localgovernments need to have in place to ensure that they provide for the future of their own regions. Ofparticular concern on the Sunshine Coast is the proposed plan to consider a pipeline from the BaroonPocket Dam to Caboolture and for that pipeline to then draw water from the region into south-eastQueensland.

When I asked the minister a question without notice about this matter, the minister made it quiteclear that a pipeline was not going to be utilised to draw water from the Sunshine Coast to Caboolture. Iask the minister to confirm that a plan is not now being considered to develop—I did not say approve—a pipeline from Baroon Pocket Dam to Caboolture. If the pipeline is being considered, who is going tomeet the cost? Who is going to pay the ongoing maintenance? Will such cost then be met by theratepayers?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I rise to a point of order. I accept that challenge. I refer the honourablemember to Aquagen, which is the Sunshine Coast water company that is proposing exactly that. It is notthe state government; it is Aquagen, a Sunshine Coast water entity.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr O’Brien): Order! There is no point of order. Mr McARDLE: I return to the point. It is my very clear understanding that this project is under the

governance and control of the department of natural resources and that it is the department that ispushing this plan. In fact, I understand that the planning has reached the point at which there are nowtime lines in place for that pipeline needing to be fast-tracked as a matter of urgency, given that in nocircumstances can the proposed dam on the Mary River be up and running within a two years. In


addition, is it not a fact that with that pipeline level 2 water restrictions will be imposed across theSunshine Coast on the basis that the level in the dams on the Sunshine Coast is significantly lower thanthe level of Wivenhoe Dam simply because they are smaller in nature?

I notice that under new section 360F there will be an annual levy payable by each water serviceprovider. The water service provider is, in fact, each local government authority or council. I amconcerned that the government is proposing to establish a Water Commission then impose upon localgovernments the obligation to pay ongoing costs after the initial 12 months. Of course, that is one morecharge that will be pushed to the ratepayers in local government authorities. That is another example ofthis government’s inability to cater for its own needs and instead have other people pay for those needsby making local government pass on charges and commitments to its ratepayers.

The local governments in this area of south-east Queensland are concerned that the stategovernment continues to ride roughshod over their desires and needs. There is a very strong argumentthat, with regard to water rationing or water resourcing, they are being left out in the cold. They simplyhave no capacity to have input into the Water Commission.

Sitting suspended from 6.28 pm to 7.30 pm. Miss ELISA ROBERTS (Gympie—Ind) (7.30 pm): It is particularly timely, considering the

situation currently occurring within my electorate and the controversy surrounding the planned dam forTraveston, that we are discussing the future of water today. I support the government’s initiative toestablish a Water Commission, as I am sure no-one could doubt that the future of water supply is notonly a crucial issue for us in Queensland but also Australia as a whole due to the fact that it is one of thedriest continents in the world.

Due to changing weather patterns worldwide, we are experiencing devastating drought conditionswhich are having a tremendous impact upon communities, none more so than the farming communities.Nearly all political leaders are placing water at the forefront of their political agendas. This priority, asarticulated by the World Commission on Dams report, is due to the fact that water demand is rapidlyoutstripping available supply in many parts of the world. Why governments and leaders have waited untilwe are in such a situation is questionable, but dwelling on what should have been or could have been isa moot point and we must now look forward to solving this most challenging of issues.

There appears to be a strong divide between city dwellers and rural dwellers with regard to waterand water usage, with both sides blaming the other for the situation we are currently facing. There isevidence which suggests that the problems regarding water access are worse in rural areas, but thegrowth of urbanisation is increasing the demand for water related services in cities. In contrast to this,water analysts claim that 67 per cent of our water is used for agriculture, 19 per cent for industry andonly nine per cent for domestic use. In 1995, according to the World Commission on Dams report,46 per cent of the world’s population lived in urban areas. Ten years down the track I have no doubt thatnumber has increased quite dramatically. However, the issue is a lot more complicated than who isusing what and how much. It is an issue which has to be understood and appreciated by all residentsand must happen sooner rather than later because when the source is gone it will not matter who wasresponsible.

When it comes to the best, cheapest and most viable option for ensuring continued water supply,there are a number of conflicting views both for and against no matter whether the option is recycling,desalination or dams. According to the report of the World Commission on Dams, which wascommissioned in 2000, the last century has seen the construction of over 45,000 dams worldwide.Whilst these dams were built in order to provide water for irrigated agriculture, domestic and industrialuse, and for flood mitigation, dams have also managed to alter river flows, reduce people’s rights andaccess to water, and have subsequently managed to result in major impacts both environmentally andsocially. It has really only been in recent years that the viability of the damming process has been calledinto question, particularly as other options for water security and availability have become available. Thereport states—The World Commission on Dams considers the end of any dam project must be the sustainable improvement of human welfare.This means a significant advance of human development on a basis that is economically viable—

that is, can we afford it?—socially equitable—

such as: is the dam simply for the purpose of ensuring water for south-east Queensland?—and environmentally sustainable.

That means the effects on flora and fauna which may be in danger of extinction. The commission doesbelieve that if a large dam is the best way to achieve this goal then it deserves our support. But whereother options offer better solutions we should favour them over large dams.

The WCD report states quite clearly exactly what the people of my electorate have beenexperiencing. The decision to build a large dam is an extremely sensitive one and is one which the lasttwo weeks have shown can trigger a mixture of apprehension, hopes and fears both rational andirrational. By the year 2000 we were extracting twice the volume that we were drawing 50 years ago.


With the rapid growth in population, that volume will no doubt increase even more in the years to come.One of the resulting factors of lack of adequate water supply for rural areas is the increasing numbers offarmers who are forced to give up their farms and are required, through necessity, to move to moreurban areas in order to find alternative employment. This places further pressure on urban areas withregard to the supply of water.

The member for Callide and the National Party candidate in Gympie only seem to be concernednot about the actual dam but about the process by which the government got there. This is so lame it isalmost laughable. On the one hand, the National Party knocks the government for dragging its heels inrespect of the building of dams and, on the other hand, complains because it has decided to build damsnow. How could any government win this argument?

It is very telling that the National Party is being very cagey about the Traveston Dam. NationalParty members will not say outright that they do not support it. Instead, they are crying over the process.The member for Callide today called on Beattie to fast-track these dams. I wonder what his NationalParty supporters in the Mary Valley think about those comments. The same member also spoke aboutthe National Party’s great support for recycling, yet only last year another of his colleagues ranted in thisHouse about how terrible it would be to force people to drink other people’s recycled sewage. Theirviews seem to change daily. How can this party, in respect of the Water Commission, complain on theone hand that nothing is being done and then whinge because it is has happened too fast? You cannothave it both ways, boys.

One of the major questions regarding the building of a large dam is the amount of rainfall. Withglobal warming contributing to less rainfall, one wonders how viable large dams will be for future watersupply. It is interesting to note that in the US since 1998 the decommissioning of dams has overtakenthe construction of dams. Mostly this has been done in order to restore fisheries and riverine ecologicalprocesses.

One of the problems of large dams is evident in the extent to which they can alter the flow of ariver system. The World Resources Institute found that at least one large dam modifies 46 per cent ofthe world’s 106 primary watersheds. In addition, there are the problems of closing the mouths of majorrivers, salt intrusion, destruction of mangroves and loss of wetlands. As I mentioned this morning in theHouse, the adverse effects a dam could have on the livelihoods of those who rely on river flowdownstream of any subsequent dam are real, and the social consequences of altered river flows can bedevastating.

The aforementioned dam report describes the displacement of between 40 and 80 million peopleworldwide over the years during the construction phase of dams. Many of these displaced people werenot adequately compensated, and I am very hopeful that the Premier will keep his word to ensure thatnobody is worse off as a consequence of any Queensland dams. One area of criticism of the dammingprocess and subsequent resettlement is that for a dam the area required is a lot larger than that requiredfor any other types of infrastructure such as roads—which my electorate, too, can relate to veryintimately—as they can be situated on marginal land, whereas dams generally flood rich agriculturalland. The benefits have to be weighed up against the costs. Whilst the Premier has said that he wouldlike to work with the council to ensure that as many people as possible can be resettled within the shire,realistically, though, the likelihood of that occurring is doubtful.

The whole dam debate has many layers and takes in a number of issues. Some evidence hasshown that dams do not always meet their targets. Historically, though, it must be said that dams haveserved us well. But the world is changing and our values have changed. More of us have become moreaware of and concerned with the environment, as we realise the destructive consequences much of ourinfrastructure has had upon the natural environment. I do believe that, dam or no dam, there must alsobe further alternatives such as recycling and/or desalination, which personally is not a favourite of minedue to the high energy costs and the question of what to do with the extracted salt. Minor changes canoccur with compulsory rainwater tanks on all new homes, but where does that leave multistoreydwellings? We also need to review our use of greywater for lawns et cetera. I call on this government toencourage public participation in the planning process and to look seriously at the successfulalternatives which are in place in the Middle East, Singapore and London.

There is a great deal of information and copious arguments both for and against damconstruction. As one does more and more research, one finds that there are more questions thananswers as to whether dams are still appropriate. The majority of residents of the Mary Valley areagainst the building of a dam at Traveston. The reasons for that are various and numerous, but each isjust as important as the next. The upheaval that those people are facing is extensive and will be lifechanging.

I hope that, if the government is determined to go ahead with this project, the dam does not layhalf empty due to a lack of rain—members should remember that for the past five years we haveexperienced serious drought—for the next 30 years. Because of this situation Gympie has not floodedfor a number of years and, if the current weather patterns remain, it is unlikely to do so ever again. For a


government to force around 900 families to make such an incredible sacrifice is a big ask, particularlywhen the appropriateness of the infrastructure is surrounded with such uncertainty and its ultimatesuccess is questionable.

Finally, my personal preference is for recycling. If it is good enough for our naval personnel it isgood enough for the rest of us. That is my solution to the whole dam dilemma.

Mr HOOLIHAN (Keppel—ALP) (7.40 pm): In rising to support the Water Amendment Bill, Isuggest that the minister might like to spend some of his department’s funding on a crystal ball and amagic wand because, according to the member for Caloundra, that is the only way that goodgovernment can occur. It is patently obvious that that is not correct.

I support the Water Amendment Bill and I congratulate the minister on the work of his department.In doing so, I would like to address the progress being made in central Queensland in relation to watersupply matters.

Whilst most speakers will deal with aspects of the bill that relate to south-east Queensland, I turnto the Capricorn Coast, which has been on level 3 water restrictions for some 12 months. We take ourwater from two very small creeks north of Yeppoon and they are in a state of great distress. Therefore, Iwish to broaden the geographic discussion on the new Water Commission to include how it mightimpact on and assist central Queensland.

The central Queensland regional water supply study was initiated by the state government in2004. Through that study a draft water supply strategy was developed collaboratively with localgovernment. The draft water supply strategy was made available for a three-month period for publiccomment and is expected to be finalised midyear. I am pleased to see that the Water Amendment Bill2006 recognises the strategy development undertaken by the state and local governments, andprovides arrangements for it to be transitioned as if the work were undertaken under the bill.

Contrary to the suggestion that some of this is knee-jerk government, the central Queenslanddraft water supply strategy was developed through a partnership process. Contributions have beenmade by local government, state government, water service providers, the Central Queensland LocalGovernment Association, industry and Indigenous and community representatives. Therefore, it isessential that the good work achieved through this process be given recognition in the legislation.

Earlier today in the chamber I spoke of Beef Australia 2006. I point out that central Queensland iscritical to Queensland’s future development. In central Queensland mining expansion as well as theexpansion of the industrial and agricultural sectors are expected to contribute substantially toQueensland’s future prosperity. The Dawson-Mackenzie-Fitzroy watertable and rivers are the secondlargest watershed in Australia. Real consideration is being given to how the water that flows throughthose rivers can be used to support the expansion of industry.

A growing population demand for water by mining and industry, combined with a naturallyvariable climate, has seen water resources in central Queensland come under increasing pressure, asthey have in other areas as indicated by the member for Barron River in her speech today. The currentdrought, which is exacerbated by climate change, has highlighted this for the rural, industrial and urbansectors. Any long-term effects of climate change could exacerbate water supply issues for all ofQueensland, but certainly for central Queensland where conditions have become progressively drierover the past 100 years. Once the central Queensland water supply strategy is finalised, it will be aguide for the central Queensland communities to maximise the effectiveness of existing suppliesthrough water trading and improved water use efficiency and it is a path forward for future infrastructuredevelopment.

Two concerns repeatedly raised during consultations on the strategy were: how will it be deliveredand how can we ensure the strategy does not just gather dust on a shelf and is never delivered on?Previously, there was no real means of delivering a strategy of this type, but the Water Amendment Bill2006 provides that means. The bill provides the means for transitioned existing work undertaken for theCentral Queensland Regional Water Supply Strategy. That means that there is now a statutory processthat can be used to ensure regional water security programs, such as the strategy being developed incentral Queensland, can be delivered.

In concluding my remarks, I acknowledge the government’s commitment to raising the EdenBann Weir on the Fitzroy River and to building a new weir at Rookwood, also on the Fitzroy River. Thatis to be funded through the Queensland Future Growth Fund. As part of that contribution to water supplyin central Queensland, I have spoken to the Premier, Deputy Premier and other ministers in relation toour water supply problems on the Capricorn Coast to seek the provision of a pipeline. Previously, it hadbeen suggested that a pipeline be run from Rockhampton’s allocation in its barrage. However, despiteall of its water flow, the Fitzroy River is not inexhaustible. The two new weirs will certainly contribute tothe provision of additional water and will allow further consideration of that pipeline.

Both of the projects were detailed in the Central Queensland Regional Water Supply Strategy.The government’s commitment to the projects is proof positive of the importance of the region-widewater supply strategy process.


During this debate, I listened with interest to the member for Maryborough, who mentioned thatthe dam was not going to be built in his electorate. Then he said that he is not a nimby—not in mybackyard. It appears that he means that we can build a dam, but not anywhere he lives, although wehave to make sure that there is enough water. Once again I say to the minister, perhaps a crystal balland magic wand will assist in making all of those dreams come true, although certainly that is not theway of good government. On that basis, I commend the bill to the House.

Mr KNUTH (Charters Towers—NPA) (7.47 pm): The explanatory notes to this bill refer tothe amendment of the Water Act to create a Water Commission whose main area of responsibility willbe south-east Queensland. However, the minister can direct the commission to operate in regions andother parts of Queensland as well. The main function of the commission will be to advise the minister onissues relating to water supply and demand management, including infrastructure development. Theminister does not need any more advice on water infrastructure development as the people ofQueensland have been screaming out for a dam.

The south-east corner’s water infrastructure is all about a lack of planning. When I talk about alack of planning, I am referring to south-east Queensland and all over Queensland, including rural andregional Queensland. We also have infrastructure problems in south-east Queensland. I believe thatthose problems can be solved if we provide the infrastructure in rural and regional Queensland as well.

When talking about water infrastructure, there are a number of sites that I should mention: theO’Connell Creek project which was pushed by the Richmond Shire Council, the Hell’s Gate Dam on theBurdekin River and a number of sites on the Bowen Basin.

The Flinders Shire Council has completed a cost-benefit analysis to build a 250-megalitre dam onthe Flinders River. The Flinders River is Queensland’s longest river and has approximately 50 per centof the flow of the Burdekin, yet there is not one single weir or dam on the river system. A dam on theFlinders River has the potential to irrigate 17,000 hectares of land, diversifying the industry based in theshire with the addition of irrigational crops leading to economic advantages for people who live in thisarea and for the state. The site chosen for a potential dam is 15 kilometres north-east of Hughenden.There would also be significant benefits associated with such a project, including recreational andtourism benefits.

An intermediate scenario developed in relation to the study determined that the capital costneeded to develop the dam is around $70 million. The introduction of cropping in this region would resultin significant increases in the growth of the area. The area is best suited to the crops that are found inthe Emerald irrigation area, in particular cotton, crops related to cattle production and horticultural crops.

The people of the Georgetown area are also waiting impatiently for news of the proposed GreenHills Dam on the Gilbert River. The land and water assessment report noted that the area was clearlyidentified as worthy of further investigation and after three levels of assessment the option to build a weirwas upgraded to a dam.

For over two years members of the gulf water resource plan committee have provided input intothe plan and they are asking when the moratorium will be lifted. The people seeking an increase inwater entitlements are asking when they can start planning for their future. When can future and existingwater users apply for increased allocations? Currently there is less than 0.5 per cent of mean annualflow in existing surface water entitlements. The length of time the moratorium is in existence severelyimpacts on the region’s ability to plan for its future.

What sort of management is this? Billions of megalitres of water pour into the gulf region eachyear and they cannot pump out a drop of water from those river systems. We are talking about jobs; weare talking about aquaculture; we are talking about irrigation. All that they are asking for is a few drops tobe pumped out of the millions of megalitres pouring into that gulf each year. The minister cannot evenprovide them with a drop. Something has to be wrong with the system. I ask the minister to indicate inhis reply when that moratorium will be lifted for that gulf region. When will the minister give the people inthat region an opportunity to utilise the water that falls out of the sky that pours into that gulf each year?

Government members interjected. Mr KNUTH: Yes, you might have learnt something tonight. We are not talking here about an area

where there are thousands of residents; we are talking about an area where you can travel 200kilometres and not see one single person. There is a moratorium on those river systems and theycannot pump a drop of water out of them. I hope that the minister will do something positive and givethese people an opportunity to utilise that water.

Another issue is the $300 million pipeline. It actually costs more to build this pipeline than to buildthe entire Burdekin Dam, which is seven times the size of Sydney Harbour. What sort of management isthis? SunWater has identified a site that is on the Isaac River at a cost of $50 million and there are othersites in that region that have been identified that would be much cheaper than a $300 million pipelineproject. That is more than what it cost to build the Burdekin Dam.


In the Joh years dams were built and water infrastructure was put in place. He built power stationsand he opened up this state. When members look back after they have been removed from governmentall they can possibly say they achieved is a footbridge and a sports stadium.

Mr WALLACE (Thuringowa—ALP) (7.53 pm): Madam Deputy Speaker Barry, can I just say againwhat a pleasure it is to have you in the chair this evening. I rise to support the Water Amendment Bill2006. This bill is an essential further step forward in improving the management of Queensland’s waterresources. Before I get into the bill proper, can I correct some of this National Party mythology which isgoing around this evening and that is that the National Party played some role in the construction of themighty Burdekin Dam, Queensland’s biggest dam. That is a pure National Party myth, one theyprobably tell their kids before they go to bed at night. It was actually the Hawke Labor government whichcommitted to funding and building the Burdekin Dam prior to the 1983 federal election. It was the thenLabor candidate for Herbert, Mr Ted Lindsay, who called on the then opposition leader Bob Hawke tomake that commitment. To Bob Hawke’s credit, he made that commitment and the funds wereforthcoming after the election of the first Hawke government. One only has to think back to 1945—

Mr Knuth interjected.Mr WALLACE: If the member for Charters Towers would like to come back to his chair so that I

can actually take the interjection—Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Barry): Order! That is correct. The member for Charters Towers

will interject from his own seat, please. Mr WALLACE: It is another cheap shot from the National Party, which forgets the history of the

Burdekin Dam, because it was the Labor Chifley and Curtin governments in 1945 that actually set up thecommissions that studied the construction of the Burdekin Dam, and it took the election of the Hawkegovernment in 1983 to fulfil that particular promise.

In my maiden speech in this place I actually called for stage 2 of that wonderful scheme, and Ihope that in my time in this place we will see construction of stage 2 of the Burdekin Dam so that it willreach its full capacity and really become the jewel in Queensland’s water crown.

Getting back to the other facets of this bill, the establishment of a new Queensland WaterCommission under the Water Amendment Bill 2006 will provide a coordinated approach to manage thesupply and demand for water in south-east Queensland. Water supply and demand in south-eastQueensland has not been in the past managed in a shared way across the region. The commission willlook at the supply and demand balance of the region as a whole, including rural users, and will ensurethat necessary developments are in place to provide water security in the region.

The Water Amendment Bill 2006 has provisions to allow the commission’s brief to extend beyondsouth-east Queensland to other parts of the state. I believe this is a very sensible approach that can onlyengender a greater partnership between the government, local councils, water service providers andultimately water users.

Water reform is fundamental to the prosperity of Queensland as it ultimately provides greatercertainty for investment and the environment. Queensland is a signatory to the 2004 National WaterInitiative, which builds on the 1994 Council of Australian Governments Framework for Water Reform.The National Water Initiative encompasses a wide range of water management issues and encouragesthe adoption of best practice approaches to the management of water.

In meeting the state’s commitments under the National Water Initiative, the Beattie governmenthas been undertaking catchment based water resource planning. Water resource planning activitiesnow cover over 90 per cent of Queensland. Water resource planning balances both consumptive andnon-consumptive water requirements in each catchment. It also enables water trading by convertingexisting water entitlements to tradable water allocations.

Water trading is an efficient and fair means of reallocating water and therefore promotesefficiency and innovation and encourages the development of productive enterprises. To address thecross-jurisdictional water planning arrangements under the National Water Initiative the Queenslandgovernment is developing an intergovernmental agreement and a memorandum of understanding withthe New South Wales government for water sharing in the Border Rivers. Queensland is also workingcollaboratively with other jurisdictions on matters such as water registers, water resource accounting,water service provider benchmarking, water metering and customers’ water accounts.

In regard to water charges, Queensland will continue to work with the federal government todevelop consistent approaches to pricing and costs for water planning and management. This is also inaccordance with the National Water Initiative. At the same time this government will continue to workwith industry on this matter. We are proceeding with an independent analysis on water planning andmanagement costs. We will also work together on business improvement opportunities for thedepartment. We are committed to developing an accountable and transparent process to meet ourNational Water Initiative commitments.


Through the National Water Initiative the Beattie government is committed to a number of urbanwater reform strategies, including increasing water use efficiency in domestic and commercial settings,encouraging the re-use and recycling of waste water where it is cost effective, encouraging innovation inwater supply sourcing, treatment, storage and discharge and improving pricing arrangements formetropolitan water, including providing households with information on their water use.

Queensland continues to make excellent progress in meeting its national commitments for waterreform. I would like to point out to all honourable members that Queensland is the only Murray-Darlingstate not threatened with penalties for not complying with the water components of the nationalcompetition policy. This was identified in the recently published 2005 National Competition PolicyAssessment of Water Reform Progress. The Beattie government is committed to a number of strategiesto ensure that we have enough water in Queensland to meet our current and future needs. The WaterAmendment Bill 2006 is one of these.

Before concluding tonight, I would urge all members to support this bill. I am concerned, however,at the Jekyll and Hyde approach coming from the opposition. The shadow minister told the Courier-Mailthat the commission was a good idea, yet his leader, the member for Southern Downs, has told theparliament that the commission was a media stunt. The fact is that the shadow minister is right: thecommission is a good idea and it warrants the support of all members in this House. However, I wouldnot want the shadow minister to have the wrong idea and think that the Queensland Water Commissionand its commissioners would operate in a way the previous Water Resources Commission did. TheWater Resources Commission was unfavourably mentioned in the report of the Commission of inquiryinto possible illegal activities and associated police misconduct—yes, that is right, the Fitzgerald report.Pages 95 and 96 of the report highlight the issues with the decision to construct the Tartrus Weir on theMackenzie River in central Queensland to the direct benefit of the Ten Mile property owned by theBjelke-Petersen family company. The report states—

Mr Seeney: Who wrote this? Mr WALLACE: Tony Fitzgerald wrote it. The report states—

In November, 1983, discussions took place between the Department of Primary Industries and the Water Resources Commission,in the course of which the Water Resources Commissioner advised an officer of the Department of Primary Industries that therewas no need to delineate specific irrigable areas because of representations which Bjelke-Petersen had made.

The report states further that in late 1984, on the advice of the Water Resources Commission—Irepeat, on the advice of the then Water Resources Commission—the Bjelke-Petersen family companyapplied for a number of water licences to the Mackenzie River. The report then stated—Licences were issued in January 1985, prior to Cabinet giving its approval for the construction of the Tartrus Weir.

On 16 April, 1985, after Bjelke-Petersen left the Cabinet room, Cabinet gave its approval for the construction of the Tartrus Weir onthe Mackenzie River, which was completed by late 1986. The ‘Ten Mile’, and other properties in the region, have benefitedsignificantly from the weir’s construction.

Mr Shine: Is that corruption? Mr WALLACE: That could be construed as corruption. I thank the honourable member for

Toowoomba North for his interjection. This Queensland Water Commission and this Queenslandgovernment will work for water security in the best interests of Queensland, not in the self-interests of afew, as was the case pre Fitzgerald. I again commend the bill to the House.

Mr MESSENGER (Burnett—NPA) (8.01 pm): I am happy to make a contribution to the debate onthe Water Amendment Bill 2006, because the wellbeing and health—and I am talking about the physicaland economic health—of Queensland families in our unique environment that we have been blessedwith hinges on the competent, efficient and sustainable management of our state’s water resources.

On the surface of this bill, all is calm and most casual observers will see this as an attempt tobetter manage our state’s water resources, but, as we know, still waters run deep. As the shadowminister and member for Callide, Mr Seeney, has stated, the Beattie government is now in the politics ofpanic and this legislation before the House tonight is proof of that panic. This government has finallyrealised that we need more water infrastructure, and the recent snap announcement of new dams insouth-east Queensland is nothing more than a cruel hoax. It is a cruel hoax on the people of Brisbanewho expect this water. The government is raising their hopes. It is also a cruel hoax on the people ofGympie and the Mary Valley. It has caused untold heartache.

If the government wants us to put aside the significant environmental concerns relating to thelungfish, the Mary River turtle and the Mary River cod, let us look at the basic economics of theTraveston Crossing megaproposal. The area affected by this ridiculous proposal is 7,600 hectares atapproximately $20,000 per hectare. It means the government will have to spend in buyback alone in thevicinity of $1.7 billion. Then there is the loss of infrastructure including powerlines and roads—roads thatare still being built—plus the cost of building the dam wall. We are looking at at least $300 million. Theproject will not get much change out of $2.5 billion. The Premier is not being honest with the people ofQueensland about the true cost of his grand plan to save his own political skin.


I recently attended a meeting of concerned landowners. Scott Alderson, who is the representativeof the environment council, was present at this meeting. I gave an undertaking that I would raise someof their concerns. They would like the minister, if he would be so kind in his summing-up, to answer anumber of questions. If Brisbane is going to run out of water in 2008, how can a dam being built on theMary River, which could not be finished construction by 2011 and filled up by who knows when, be asolution for Brisbane’s water crisis? Why is the government not looking at recycling and rainwater tankalternatives, as it suggests for Toowoomba? Dams, it claims, do not work in this case.

When will there be a map of proposed inundation, and when will that map be available to thepublic? Where and when will there be a cost-benefit analysis available to the public? Why has thegovernment abandoned its Water Act 2000 process for involving community consultation? The waterresource plan is not finalised. When will there be an environmental impact assessment made for publiccomment? How much water is being planned to be used from the Mary River? Why were thesecommunity people not consulted in the decision of a dam? There was absolutely no consultationwhatsoever. It was pulled out of who knows where—the dark recesses of the Premier’s mind.

What percentage of natural flows will be lost when the dam is built? How will the water resourceplan’s requirements for environmental flows be met? When will this dam proposal be referred for adetermination under the EPBC Act? Of course, that is federal environment legislation which will havethe overriding or whip hand in this situation. Many people are now saying that this is a crafty, cunningpolitical stunt to try to blame the federal government when the federal government does not giveapproval to this megalith.

They also want me to ask these questions: what are the impacts of this dam and how far will theimpacts of this dam go downstream? What will be the impact of a major flood while the dam is beingconstructed? At what rate will the dam fill up with sediment and how long will it be affected? We all knowthat this is a very shallow dam. I do not think the government has bothered to think about thesequestions. What are the environmental impacts on the Great Sandy National Park, which of course isWorld Heritage listed? What is the value of the affected fishing and tourist industries in the Wide Bay? Ithink it is around $300 million. I believe $300 million has been budgeted for land acquisitions andinfrastructure relocation. That has been proven to be completely ridiculous. It is pie in the sky stuff.

How much more money has already been spent determining a new route for the Bruce Highway?In the plan that we have seen the Bruce Highway is going to be cut off in two places. Has thegovernment taken that into consideration? Has it liaised with the DNRMW? I have been told that thiswas a bolt from the blue for the DNRMW. It had absolutely no idea that it was going to happen. Why is itpossible for the government to fund a recycling scheme for Toowoomba and not for the rest of south-east Queensland? These are important questions that the government needs to answer, as is thequestion: what has the government done in the last five years to overcome this problem? I will build onthat question and ask: what has this government done in the last eight years to alleviate this problem?

The coalition shadow minister for natural resources has correctly pointed out that this legislationwill not create an extra drop of water—not one ounce of water. This legislation is just another card in thePremier’s house of cards that he has been building. That sound that we heard from the public gallerythis morning—the boos—is the winds of change that will blow over—

Mr PALASZCZUK: Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise to a point of order. I understand that there is a fairdegree of latitude in speeches at the second reading stage, but seven minutes have elapsed and thehonourable member has not yet mentioned anything about the bill.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Copeland): Order! The minister is quite correct; there has been a lotof latitude given to both sides of this debate, not just the member for Burnett.

Mr MESSENGER: In addressing the Water Amendment Bill 2006, I have to say that, sadly,Queenslanders have learnt not to trust any legislation that this Premier brings before this place. Bitterexperience has shown us that, no matter how benign the legislation may appear, this Labor Party isalways looking for a chance to emerge from these still legislative waters like the shark from Jaws andput the bite on Queensland families. It is Queensland families who have felt the very real pain. A tidalwave of public opinion caused by this continued and sustained mismanagement of our water resourcesover the last eight years has forced the Premier and his government into bringing this legislation beforethis place, the Water Amendment Bill 2006. I offer my support for this legislation and eagerly lookforward to the opportunity to examine this legislation in detail, which will create the Queensland WaterCommission whose key functions, as mentioned in proposed section 345, will be to advise the ministeron matters relating to the water supply and demand management and delivery of desired levels ofservice objectives for water supplied to the SEQ region and other designated regions; facilitate andimplement regional water security programs; and ensure compliance with regional water securityprograms and with commissioned water restrictions. There is no doubt that, as part of an integratedwater management policy, this state needs to build dams as well as carefully consider—based on thelatest sound science—recycling initiatives and water-saving initiatives.


In relation to water recycling initiatives it is a timely moment to remind this House of theconservatives’ water recycling vision. Many times those opposite have tried to paint the conservativeside of politics as environmental vandals. It is an absolute furphy. The people from the bush have anabundance of common sense and respect for the environment. I have great confidence that thesolutions for the many environmental problems posed by water shortages will be found in the wisdom oflocal communities and families who choose to live in the bush. People from the bush know not to take45-minute showers. People from the bush know not to wash their car with a hose running all the time.They use a bucket wash. I remember a city colleague in a previous work situation who was obsessedwith washing his car. I remember having a chat with him, saying the last thing I am going to think of inmy last dying breath is, ‘I wish I had washed my car one more time!’ People from the bush know not toleave the tap running when they shave or brush their teeth.

Government members interjected. Mr MESSENGER: Members opposite have read my script. When water levels are getting really

low people from the bush ask their guests to follow the water-saving technique if they use the toilet: if itis yellow, let it mellow; if it is brown, send it down.

It is the conservatives in this parliament who are listening to local community wisdom and leadingthe way with our vision to recycle water and improve water quality in our streams, rivers and oceans bylobbying for zero ocean outfalls. Even the environment minister has recently acknowledged the validityof our vision. The environment minister recently said during a revocation debate—I also want to take a moment to commend the shadow minister for the environment on his support for zero ocean outfalls into theGreat Barrier Reef lagoon. It was absolutely excellent to hear his strong support for that objective.

It is now time for the environment minister to publicly display her support for zero ocean outfallsby taking all necessary action available to bring to an end the use of ocean outfalls. Statewide earlyresearch has shown that there are more than 30 ocean outfalls which are dumping in excess of 400megalitres of treated sewage water into the Pacific Ocean beside our Great Barrier Reef. In my ownbackyard I have inspected the ocean outfall at Bargara. I welcome the state government’s recentannouncement to provide funding for the upgrade of the Bargara waste water treatment plant, but I amcalling on the environment minister to help abolish sewage ocean outfalls. The funding of $2.6 milliontowards the upgrade of the plant is a good first step, but it is now time—the time is now; it is right—forthe government to adopt the coalition’s long-term vision for zero ocean outfalls.

The plain stark fact is that, even after the Bargara waste water treatment plant upgrade iscompleted, it will still mean that two to three megalitres of sewage water is pumped into the ocean eachday beside a beach where endangered turtles nest. The long-term common-sense solution is, of course,to re-use this water in agricultural or industrial projects. I can give examples. In the Burnett 200 farmersrely on the underground aquifer for irrigation purposes. Increasingly, that underground aquifer isbecoming saline. Many of those farmers have only 30 per cent or 40 per cent allocations. We should beable to find a way to recycle the water that is pumped into the ocean. As well as that, the Bargara GolfClub would love to use that two to three megalitres of water that goes out each day. However, becauseof the government red tape—the cooperation between local government and state government—something like $400,000 worth of studies has to be completed before even starting the recyclingprocess. We need to streamline those processes.

I visited the Virginia recycling scheme in South Australia. Another one that I can think of is therecharge of the aquifer in the Burdekin from stormwater and other run-off. They are just some of theexamples of the ways that we can recycle and make better use of our water. Of course, we should havemore tanks for water supply, as many members have mentioned here. I have to pay a compliment to theMiriam Vale Shire Council. Since 1993 it has been compulsory in that shire to use water tanks. They arebetween a rock and a hard place with no water. They are very seriously contemplating the use ofdesalination plants because there is no other viable water supply.

I turn to the issue of water weeds in the Burnett. The issue of the quality of water that is beingmanaged by the state government is paramount in my electorate as well. I drive across the CedarsCrossing over the Burnett River from which SunWater makes massive profits. As far as the eye can see,there is water weed—salvinia—on the top of this water. SunWater has not managed this problem at all.

Mr Palaszczuk: What do you mean by ‘massive’? What’s a massive profit? Mr MESSENGER: The minister would like to know what a massive problem—Mr Palaszczuk: The profit that SunWater makes. Mr MESSENGER: Around $59 million a year. Mr Palaszczuk: That is how much profit? Mr MESSENGER: Yes. I will tell the minister about the massive problem that we have in the

Burnett and Kolan rivers. I hired a light aircraft. I took the door off and hung the video camera out. Weestimate that there are some 300 to 400 hectares of water weed on both rivers. It is a massive problemand it is not being addressed by this state government, which is shirking its responsibilities.


This state government has failed to plan for the future, and this is evident by the numerous damsthat are running dry throughout our state. As was pointed out by the shadow minister for naturalresources, it is estimated that major dams in the south-east could run out of water as early asSeptember 2008 while north Queensland could face water shortages by 2015. South-west Queenslandis in a similar predicament and may lose its water supplies by 2016. What has this Beattie Laborgovernment done about this up until now? In one word, nothing. Instead, it has ignored the coalition’swarnings that the Beattie Labor government’s failure to invest in water infrastructure to cater for apopulation growth would lead to dangerous water shortages across Queensland. We have all knownabout this population growth, and the modus operandi of choosing the do-nothing option has beenreflected not only in water management but also across the broad spectrum of departments within theQueensland government. Health is another issue. It ignored the population increase there. Thisgovernment has ridiculed the coalition’s suggestions, calling on more water infrastructure. Only now isthis government waking up to the fact that implementing these water infrastructures is vital. This opinionwas backed up by the councils in the south-east late last month on 22 April.

It was reported in the Courier-Mail and later in the Sunday Mail in an article by Michael Corkhillentitled ‘Mayors accept defeat’ that council leaders admitted that the takeover of water resources wasnecessary in the south-east but only due to successive state government failings in their duty to funddams and infrastructure. I would have to point out right now that of the last 17 years we have effectivelyhad 15 years of Labor government. So the finger of blame can be pointed directly at this governmentand previous Labor regimes. It was reported—As water levels dropped below 32 per cent for the first time on record, mayors had no option but to agree that a uniform approachto water management was needed.

I note that there was considerable concern from these mayors about the undue haste of theBeattie Labor government in pushing this latest amendment bill. The article in the Courier-Mail goes onto state—Some leaders had missed a hastily convened early morning State Government meeting because a request for them to attend hadarrived too late. This was extremely convenient for the state government and hardly surprising. The article furtherstates—On Friday night, most mayors were still unaware of the detail of the Water Amendment Bill 2006 introduced into State Parliamentearlier in the day, which included fines of $100,000-plus for water providers who did not comply with upcoming plans.

Once again the Beattie Labor government has used its usual tactic of minimal communityconsultation to hastily change legislation to its liking. I am also told that these mayors and the LocalGovernment Association of Queensland were only given two weeks to respond to the amendments tothe bill and make their own suggestions—suggestions which we are yet to see taken on board by thisgovernment. In closing, I have one remark, one comment. This government has failed to improve; it istime to remove.

Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—NPA) (8.21 pm): I rise to speak to the Water Amendment Bill 2006.While I support the bill because it is responsible legislation there are a lot of issues and priorities in thislegislation that the government does not have right. I believe this is knee-jerk panic legislation put inplace by a Labor government that sees the water situation in south-east Queensland as critical.

We hear the Premier, other ministers and probably everybody in the state talking about the dailyinflux of people from other states who come across our borders and reside primarily in south-eastQueensland. The importance of the South East Queensland Regional Plan has been well and trulyoverlooked by this government for a long while. We have to look at the priorities set out in the regionalplans and address the issues that will affect the people in question.

What are we in this parliament for? Why are we elected to this parliament? We are elected torepresent our constituents. We are here to look after the ideals of those constituents and make theplaces where they live better regardless of what part of the state they come from or what business theyare in. We should be trying to give them a better quality of life. We can improve their quality of lifethrough better health services, a better education system and better public utilities. To sustain thatquality of life we have to have good water policy. Water is the essence of success anywhere. We needwater for our farms, and people and animals must be sustained by water.

As the representative of the far-western seat of Gregory, and coming from an area that does notenjoy very high rainfall and has suffered from ongoing droughts over long periods, the issue of water isparticularly important to me. Over my lifetime I have witnessed some horrid droughts. We are probablyin the sixth year of drought in some areas of western Queensland. The cattle industry is grinding to ahalt because there is no rain.

The situation is not just critical in western Queensland. Because we have a drought on the downsand in the more populated areas people are starting to realise how grave the water situation really is. Ithas only been in recent times—and thanks to the drive of the opposition—that we have seen thegovernment trying to gather some momentum and create an environment of catch-up. Catch-up is notquite good enough. We have a scenario on our hands where the government has not done the planningor consultation. That is precisely what has happened here. It is a knee-jerk reaction.


The Premier, along with the minister for natural resources, announced in recent weeks the MaryRiver Dam and also the Beaudesert Dam. What negotiations and what consultation has been done? Arethey the proper places for dams? Nobody is criticising the government for building new dams. Wesupport the building of new dams. But it is absolutely paramount that they be located in places where weare going to get rainfall and areas where the catchment is going to be satisfactory. The geotechnicalsurveys need to done properly. We need to make absolutely certain that it is a dam that will hold water.There would be nobody in this House who would like to see a dam built that is not going to besatisfactory.

The member for Thuringowa tried to pass comment on the dealings of the great man himself, SirJoh Bjelke-Petersen. I can assure members of this House tonight that if Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen weresitting in that seat over there Queensland would not have the crisis that it is confronted with now—thatis, the shortage of water in south-east Queensland. I can assure members that the hard decisions wouldhave been made and we would not see ourselves in the predicament we are in now.

I go back to the South East Queensland Regional Plan. Members might say: what does that haveto do with the Water Amendment Bill 2006? It is about educating people. There are parts of Queenslandin which to live, reside and work other than the south-east corner. This government has placed too muchemphasis on locating the population in the south-east corner. Regardless of where we are in the statethere are opportunities for growth and job opportunities. Look at the boom in the mining industry. Lookhow that industry is suffering as a result of the nonactivity and inaction of this government in terms ofgetting water into the areas in question.

There are eight mines in the Bowen Basin waiting to go but there is not satisfactory water. Look atUrannah Dam. My colleague the member for Warrego and I flew over that site recently. It is anabsolutely magnificent site. Think of the water that that would hold. We would not have half theproblems we are experiencing now if that dam was built. That would encourage the industries that flowon from the mining industry.

I bet the mayor of Bowen shire, councillor Mike Brunker, would like to see some activity from thegovernment in relation to the Elliott Channel and also the Urannah Dam. At the end of the day it is allvery well saying, ‘We are going to roll it over and do it next year or the year after,’ but the people want tosee some action now. That planning can only be done with full and proper consultation with the localauthorities in question.

The Queensland Water Commission will be made up of 17 local authorities in south-eastQueensland. I wonder how much the government has really consulted with those councils to getgenuine outcomes. This is a situation that concerns me gravely. If we are going to continue to seepeople flock into the south-east corner at the rate of 1,000 to 1,500 a week we have to do something.That is a town in itself. Every week we see another town spring up in Queensland.

Mr Palaszczuk: All the local councils love this legislation. They want this legislation.Mr JOHNSON: I take the interjection from the minister. The great majority of people who are

coming into our state every week are settling in south-east Queensland. It is taxing our water, it is taxingour electricity, it is taxing our hospitals and it is taxing our schools. Every public utility is being taxed.Nobody begrudges them coming. We cannot stop them coming. We want people to live in our state andtake advantage of the resources in question.

I take that interjection from the minister in relation to local authorities. I know that the localauthorities like these people coming, but at the end of the day are they going to have any say indecisions? Or are we going to see the Premier, the minister and the cabinet ride roughshod over anydecision local authorities make?

I notice that the Premier said in his second reading speech that in the first year it is going to costsomething like $2 million to $2.5 million to run this Water Commission. That is all very well, but tonight Iheard the member for Burnett comment on the profits that have been made by SunWater and theunfairness of SunWater pushing some agricultural users out of the equation. I believe that we have tohave some fairness in this debate. How are we going to get genuine and positive outcomes?

Although the site chosen for this Mary River Dam may be good, is it the right site? On numerousoccasions the shadow minister has stood in this parliament and talked about vegetation managementand proper and responsible management strategies that a coalition government in Queensland wouldput in place. In terms of vegetation management, I believe that the government is driven by the greenagenda. Where are the Greens in relation to this bill, which seeks to put all that prime agricultural landunder water? Is the location of this dam right? What do the Greens and the conservationists have to sayabout this? All of that magnificent prime agricultural land in the Redlands area has been turned intourban development. The farms have gone. They do not make land like that anymore. Mr ActingSpeaker, having come from Europe you would know that people in Europe certainly do not build homeson prime agricultural land. They utilise other land that is not so valuable.

Tonight I ask the Greens and the conservationists: are you going to support the government’s bill?If this is the right site for a dam, we believe that it should be supported. But what does the environmental


impact assessment say? It has not been done, and the consultation process has not been carried out.Even the federal Minister for Transport and Regional Services had no idea about this dam and it is to belocated in his electorate. What consultation has taken place with the federal government? It would havebeen courteous to have some sort of exchange with the federal government on this matter. But no, notthis government. When it comes to dealing with people on a genuine basis, it has become arrogant. Itrides roughshod over them.

Why would those farmers in the Mary Valley not have a genuine concern? If the government hasknown for so long that it will build the Mary River Dam, why did it not say something to those farmersabout it or alert the local community to it some time ago? One farmer in the area has spent $1 millionupgrading the technology on his farm to enhance his farming operations. That is a waste of money. Is hegoing to be compensated for that? I guess not if the compensation will be only in terms of the land value.I hope people will receive proper compensation.

There are still a lot of unanswered questions in relation to both of these dam sites. As theopposition leader stated in the House this morning, there are certainly other dam sites in Queenslandthat can be examined. They may be better sites. This evening the member for Toowoomba Southreferred to dam sites on the New South Wales border. They would certainly be good dam sites. Thegovernment pooh-poohed the Wolffdene Dam because the idea for that dam was conceived by acoalition government. When the Goss government came to power in 1989, nobody would have dreamtthat this area would be experiencing a drought like we have now. Hopefully, we will never experienceanother such drought.

As a result of poor planning, our current reservoirs are being overtaxed as they have received norain and they are trying to service a population explosion. That poor planning was brought about by agovernment that cannot make the hard decisions at the right time. If the government had any vision, itwould have expected this population explosion to occur. It would have known for a long time of theinfrastructure that was required to sustain that growing population and where that population would belocated.

When I was the minister for transport I introduced the Integrated Regional Transport Plan. I knowthat transport ministers who succeeded me have worked with that document. It is a living, workingdocument. The South East Queensland Regional Plan has not been adhered to by this government.That is another example of arrogance by this government. It has not shown leadership and vision interms of how to address the future water needs of this state.

If every household in south-east Queensland had a rainwater tank, that would certainly go a longway towards addressing the water shortages that we are experiencing currently. This morning themember for Toowoomba South spoke to me about the rainwater tanks that he has on his farm and howfar the water from those tanks goes. Tonight the member for Burnett said that many members on thisside of the House have come from the bush and know what it is like to go without a drink of water. I canremember days in the saddle when I would not have a drink of water from daylight until dark. A lot ofpeople still do that, because they have to try to preserve water.

As the member for Burnett said, many members on the government side think that water comesout of a tap like milk comes out of a carton that is taken off the grocery store shelf and butter comes outof a container. No, those agricultural products come from farms and the water comes from the sky. It isabout time we had full and proper consultation right across Queensland in an apolitical manner toaddress the water issues in question.

I do not believe that people should try to make political mileage out of this issue. We genuinelyhave a crisis of monumental proportions that is not going to go away. I do not know to what extent thegovernment has explored technologies such as desalination. Other countries have desalination plants.But towns such as Kalgoorlie in Western Australia—a goldmining town—receive water from Perth. It hasdesalination plants and recycling procedures. Has there been an investigation as to how satisfactorythat process has been? We only need to go to Townsville to look at how water is recycled at the nickelsmelter at Yabulu. All of these water recycling issues are very important components of waterconservation. I also suggest that we look at how the Israelis and the Saudis manage their water to makeit go a lot further. Australia is a dry continent. Owing to climate change, it is becoming warmer. As ourenvironment has changed, our rainfall has decreased.

What role is the Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for State Development, Trade andInnovation playing in this matter? Has she told the people of Queensland where the money is going tocome from for these dams? The shadow minister, the member for Callide, made reference to the cost ofresumptions to build these dams. Has the government done the calculations on the cost of theresumptions? If the government is genuine in its offer of compensation, I bet the resumptions are goingto cost two or three times more than what the dams will cost to build.

I am talking here about prime agricultural land. I am not talking about a hard rock gorge orsomething like that; I am talking about genuine, alluvial agricultural land—something that they do notmake anymore, something that is a very rare commodity in this country and something that I believeshould be held sacred for future generations.


We have to try to provide for those people who come across our borders and want to reside inQueensland, regardless of the area in which they settle. Gympie is the home of the dairy industry inQueensland. The Mary Valley is magnificent country. It is a prime piece of Queensland’s agriculturalland. What will be the future of Gympie? Have we looked at the fallout of this decision? This week atGympie 1,500 head of cattle went through the saleyards. If that agricultural land at Mary Valley was shutdown, I doubt whether there would be a cattle sale in Gympie. There might be the sale of a couple ofhundred head here or there, but it would not be a viable operation. There are going to be flow-on effectsarising from this decision.

I heard the Premier say here in the House this morning that the Mary River Dam is going toeliminate flooding in Gympie and Maryborough. That is all very well. But, at the same time, I believe thatthis is knee-jerk Labor policy on the run. I really believe that there needs to be a thorough andcomprehensive exchange of dialogue and further investigation before the government signs off on thedeal. If it is the right deal, if everything is square and above board, yes. If it is not, the governmentshould look at alternatives.

The minister has stood up in the House on numerous occasions and said that he is going to builddams and more dams and more dams. I applaud him for that but he has to get it right. There are goodsites around the state on which we can build dams. I ask the minister to swallow his pride and find thosesites and do it in a proper consultative way, not as a knee-jerk reaction, riding roughshod over peopleand taking them for granted. There are a lot of local people out there—they might not be geotechnicalpeople—who would be able to tell us where the sites in genuine rainfall areas are. I think thegovernment should also be educating people to reside in other parts of Queensland to take the burdenoff the south-east corner.

Time expired. Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (8.41 pm): I have been subjected to some confusion over

the position the opposition is taking on the Water Amendment Bill, on matters of water generally and onthe Mary River Dam specifically. There has been a tremendous amount of confusion on the part of theopposition over which tack to take—to support the bill, to oppose the bill; to support that dam, to opposethat dam; to support dams generally or to oppose dams generally. Those opposite have a vision for thewatering and drought-proofing of Queensland. However, they see it as the responsibility of Laborgovernments only—never of the Bjelke-Petersen or the Borbidge governments. I was waiting for one orother of the opposition members to blame the Ryan government for the failure to build these damsearlier. At the end of the day, I suspect this is an attempt at a cunning ploy—on the one hand, to be infavour of dams but, on the other hand, to try to wrest the seat of Gympie from the Independent memberby swaying with what they believe to be the political breeze in that city at the moment.

A number of views have been expressed by the opposition in this debate. The member forToowoomba South, who owned a property which will now be affected by the proposed dam—and Iunderstand that situation—regrets what is going to happen to the people who own properties on the site.I sympathise with them. It is beautiful country up there at Gympie. My great-grandfather prospected forgold at Gympie in 1867. I was there only last Wednesday. My heart does go out to the people who willbe adversely affected by the dam. I can relate to them. I know that in the Brisbane Valley my own familysuffered the effects of resumption for the Wivenhoe Dam, which was built by the then National Partygovernment in the late seventies. That dam was built for the same reason: it was for the common goodof the people of south-east Queensland, and that is the reason the Mary River Dam is being built. Thatis the reality of the situation.

In speaking on the Water Amendment Bill 2006, I would like to address some rural water issues inQueensland as well as issues that are pertinent and relevant to the community of Toowoomba. This billin itself is very significant and progresses necessary reforms for water management in Queensland. Akey pillar of the national and Queensland water reform agenda is about pricing and, more specifically,about pricing water sustainability.

Under the 2004 National Water Initiative agreement—and that was largely, and to his credit,promoted by the then Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson—irrigation water prices are required tomove towards ‘upper bound’, that is, a rate of return on capital invested, where practical. In Queensland,irrigators and SunWater, which we know is the government owned water supplier and service provider,have been engaged currently in a two-tier setting process approved by the government and proposedby SunWater, its customers and the Queensland Farmers Federation.

With tier 1, a committee of SunWater customers and industry representatives negotiated withSunWater and came to an agreement on statewide pricing policies and reference prices which was toapply to all water supply schemes. SunWater has announced the conclusion of the tier 1 negotiationsand, under the pricing principles and guidelines developed by tier 1, almost half of the state’s irrigatorswill see no real increase in real terms in the amount they pay for water in the next five years. Tier 2involves negotiations between SunWater and local customer committees at scheme levels in which finalprices will be set. The new price period will be from 1 July 2006 until 30 June 2011.


Of course, price is by no means the sole tool to encourage sustainable use of water. Our irrigationand farming industries have made dramatic advances in improving their productive use of water. I ampleased to say that the government has played a substantial role through the Rural Water Use EfficiencyInitiative, RWUEI. It started in 1999. The government committed $1.5 million for four years to addressthe water use efficiency of rural industries in the south-east Queensland region. I was pleased to hearthe minister’s announcement that negotiations with industry groups are at a stage that this program isnow progressing and that by 2009 savings of 30 billion litres per annum are expected as a result of thisinvestment. That is an absolutely fantastic result.

This commitment is part of the government’s commitment to the South East QueenslandRegional Plan and the South East Queensland Infrastructure Plan and program. The program has beencalled South East Queensland Irrigation Futures and will be managed by the Department of NaturalResources, Mines and Water under its existing budget, using the same staff as those managingRWUE3. Therefore, all of the $1.5 million per year will be available to the external organisationsinvolved.

Agreements have now been established with the five major irrigation industries in the region—firstly, fruit and vegetables, then dairy and fodder, production nurseries, turf production and flowerproduction. The first two industries have been partners in the Rural Water Use Efficiency Initiative since1999, although the extension of the dairy industry to include fodder producers is a new dimension.Production nurseries, turf production and flower production are three lifestyle horticulture industries thatare new partners with the government in addressing water use efficiency.

Growcom, from the fruit and vegetable industry, is also expanding its focus to include the wateruse efficiency of packing sheds. Milestones and targets have been set for each industry and it isexpected to build sustainability on the water savings that have been made under the Rural Water UseEfficiency Initiative since 1999. In addition, south-east Queensland Irrigation Futures will deliverreductions on the off-farm impacts of farm activities.

Each industry is required to contribute to the achievement of the management action targets ofSouth East Queensland Catchments, which is the local natural resource management body. In additionto the agreements with the five production industries, an agreement has been established with SouthEast Queensland Catchments. This agreement, valued at $200,000 per year, requires South EastQueensland Catchments to coordinate the region-wide activities of the production industries in orderthat all possible synergies between the industries be realised.

South East Queensland Irrigation Futures also allocates $200,000 per year to the CooperativeResearch Centre for Irrigation Futures to provide coordination and direction for relevant research in theregion. Since 1999, the government has committed a total of $65 million to rural water use efficiencyprograms throughout Queensland. That is a very substantial investment.

Before concluding my comments, I want to discuss the water situation in Toowoomba andsurrounding communities which, as you would know, Mr Deputy Speaker, are on very serious level 4restrictions at the moment.

Mr Seeney interjected. Mr SHINE: If the member listens, he will learn. Mr Seeney interjected. Mr SHINE: Well, if most people listened they would learn, but in the member’s case there is an

element of doubt. The prolonged drought has placed enormous pressure on the water supplies held bythe city’s existing water storages. The Toowoomba City Council has taken a proactive approach to theneed for alternative and secure sources of water. The council’s Toowoomba Water Futures Program hasseriously examined the potential of a range of sources, including the indirect potable use of recycledwater.

If the honourable member for Callide looks back in Hansard, he will find out what the WaterFutures Program is all about. He can read the speech of the honourable member for Toowoomba South,and the honourable member for Cunningham made some glowing references to it earlier in the year. Irecommend those speeches to the honourable member for Callide. They show either a greatunderstanding of what is proposed and the attributes of it, or the best backflips that I have ever seen inthis parliament.

Mr Knuth interjected. Mr SHINE: As I said before, if members listen, they will be enlightened. The government has

worked with the council. It has offered to pay one-third of the cost of the project, with the council and thefederal government contributing the other two-thirds. Hopefully, the honourable member understandsthat.

The Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Water independently assessed the variousoptions being put forward and concluded that the Toowoomba Water Futures proposal stacked up andthe others did not. The federal government, a Liberal-National Party government as I recall, has nowoffered funding for the proposal. However, its funding is contingent on the result of a referendum of thelocal community.


The fact is that three levels of government have committed funding for the Toowoomba WaterFutures proposal. The federal government’s decision, albeit with the condition of a referendum beingconducted, is Canberra’s endorsement that the proposal is safe and will best secure future watersupplies for Toowoomba. Mr Deputy Speaker, you will recall raising the safety issue in a question to theminister in question time today. When you resume your seat, I would ask you to ponder long and hardon the federal government’s position, its stand on this issue and its inherent guarantee of safety in termsof its approval and substantial support—it will provide one-third of the cost—of this proposal.

The Leader of the National Party has put the state opposition’s option forward. As I understand it,it is the use of coal seam methane gas supplied from the western Darling Downs, along with outlawingrecycled water for drinking purposes.

Mr Seeney: Irrigation water; tell the full story. Mr SHINE: The member had 20 minutes to do so. Mr Reeves: Sixty minutes, actually. Mr SHINE: I take that interjection from the member for Mansfield. The National Party’s methane

gas option uses a form of recycled water. This particular option was examined independently by theDepartment of Natural Resources, Mines and Water and the conclusion was that it did not stack up. Itwould not provide the same level of water security that the Toowoomba Water Futures proposal wouldprovide.

Quite contrary to the contention of the member for Toowoomba South earlier tonight, the stategovernment has in fact supported Toowoomba during the water problems it is experiencing andsupported it in a very tangible way in terms of that promise of one-third of the cost of the Water FuturesProgram. That is not chicken feed. It is $23 million on today’s prices.

Mr Seeney: I don’t think Ian Macfarlane would agree with that. Mr SHINE: We will come to Mr Macfarlane shortly. The National Party members of parliament

and their spokespeople have taken varying positions on the Toowoomba Water Futures proposal. Somehave been strongly in favour of it, and I will refer to the words of the member for Toowoomba Southwhich I am happy to supply to any subsequent speaker on this side of the House. I have mentioned themember for Cunningham and, of course, the federal member for Groome who on Monday or Tuesdaywas the strongest supporter of the scheme but by Friday had done a complete backflip on the proposal.That was an extraordinary example of indecision and one wonders why that happened.

Of course, tonight the honourable member for Toowoomba South was completely silent on theproposal. As far as I am concerned, the federal government’s request for a referendum to be heldbefore it delivers on its commitment is something that we have to comply with. We can have views onwhether or not it is a courageous step. One could ask if they propose a referendum for Toowoombabefore giving us some funding, should referendums be imposed in relation to other issues thatgovernments have to decide, such as the war on Iraq, the IR reforms or the imposition of the GST. I notethat the federal government has not committed to fund any alternative proposal to secure Toowoomba’sfuture water supplies.

In answer to the prodding of the member for Callide, I am very content to support thegovernment’s position as it relates to Toowoomba’s current water crisis, which is to support the WaterFutures scheme. Obviously all will depend on the outcome of the referendum. I support the legislationbefore the House.

Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (8.53 pm): The Water Amendment Bill 2006 sets up anew advisory body for the minister. I have listened with interest to the debate up until now and thevarying points of view expressed on the effectiveness or otherwise of the commission and, indeed, howmuch extra water will be generated as a result of setting up this structure. In his second reading speech,the Premier stated—The institutional arrangements for water supply and management in south-east Queensland are particularly complex, with 19water storages owned by 12 different bodies... There is also multiple ownership of water treatment plants, pumping stations,pipelines and waste water treatment facilities.

He goes on to say—This issue and the need to review the institutional arrangements for water supply was highlighted in the South East QueenslandRegional Plan. This approach that we have taken, with the support of local governments, is quite unique in Australia.

Water supply, water treatment and reticulation have been the responsibility of local governmentsfor many years since their institution. I would have to say that overwhelmingly local councils have donea jolly good job at providing a potable water supply in a reliable manner and sometimes in some fairlydifficult circumstances in terms of reticulation patterns and affordability. I put on the record mycongratulations to all local authorities that have worked tirelessly over the years, not only in the shortterm but in long-term planning and augmentation programs. In my own electorate, the Gladstone AreaWater Board, whose members represent the communities, has done an excellent job.


As the Gladstone-Calliope general geographical area grew and its industrial base and demand forindustrial water expanded, I believe the water board, and those two local authorities, continued to supplya very reliable source of water. The sad thing in relation to water is that we generally only look atalternatives and backup supplies when things start to get a little bit difficult. That occurred in the regionbefore Cyclone Benny when we were on second level restrictions and industry was on 25 per centreduction in water access and looking at 50 per cent. If it was not for Cyclone Benny coming down thecoast and replenishing the supply in the Awoonga Dam, industries in the area would have been insignificant trouble. There were some good, positive initiatives that arose as a result of that tension.Recycling of water was undertaken from the Gladstone water treatment plants back into QAL forindustry supply. That has been excellent. It meant that the Gladstone City Council could finally get to astage where there were no outfalls into either the Narrows or any other water catchment.

Calliope shire had been recycling a lot of its effluent for quite a long time with the cooperation of anumber of sporting fields. This was used for irrigation of the council owned sporting areas in Boyne-Tannum in particular. When things get stressful in terms of water supply some very good initiatives aregenerated. Unfortunately, once that tension and pressure go so does the imperative. Since CycloneBenny quite a lot of the initiative and impetus has ceased to be apparent and so some of the planningthat was in place has lost its momentum. That is regrettable.

Prior to Cyclone Benny a decision had been made to increase the supply of water to the region,as I said, because of industrial growth. There were a number of studies carried out on about five areaswhere dams could be built and the two frontrunners were Calliope River, which is currently anunimpounded river, and the Boyne River, which had the original Awoonga Dam and had had one or tworaisings already. It was easy to see the difference in the downstream ecology of the Boyne Rivercompared to the Calliope River. I listened to the community but had personally come to the decision thatit was better to raise the Boyne River—which had been telegraphed anyway because there wereseveral stages in the planning—than impound the Calliope River and risk the ecology of the river. Therewere a number of crustacean nurseries and there were other biodiversities in the Narrows at the mouthof the Calliope River and it was important that those considerations be given due weight.

Additionally, the catchment that was to be placed on the Calliope River was to be shallow in depthbut wide in its extent, and what appears to have been underestimated in the initial planning andinvestigation was that the evaporation rates on the Calliope River Dam were going to be significantlymore than had been originally factored in. Eventually the decision was made to raise the Awoonga Damand that was completed, thankfully, just prior to Benny coming down. I still believe that the raising of theBoyne River—the Awoonga Dam—was the right decision to make. That watercourse was alreadyaffected. The rain patterns and the collection patterns for the Boyne River were well known. People wholived in the Boyne Valley had known about the other stages of the raising of the Awoonga Dam, but whatcame home to me was the grief and the stress generated by the loss of farms. We did not have a hugenumber. It is my understanding that in relation to the Traveston Dam there are 900 properties that will beinundated or in the buffer area. Even if there are multiple property owners, there are 600 or 700 propertyowners whose land will be resumed.

To those people, particularly those who have been on those properties for a period of time,perhaps several generations, the loss of that property is heart wrenching. There are uncompensatableissues such as historical and emotional connection to the property. There is the emotional investment inthose properties, not only with the current generation but also with previous generations. Those sorts ofthings cannot be compensated for with money. The resumption of land for inundation creates incrediblestresses within families and some families do not survive the stress. I believe that decision makers haveto recognise that these things are not always easy to assess in dollar terms. This has occurred in myelectorate, not with an inundation area but with an industrial area that was purchased. In a press releaseit was stated—

Inspecting the likely dam site at Traveston from the air yesterday Premier Beattie asked landowners to make a sacrifice on behalfof all Queenslanders.

The truth is that the people in the south-east corner will benefit the most from the dam and are notgoing to be the ones directly affected. So it is pretty easy for the Premier to say, ‘You people up there’—most of whom are not Labor supporters—’have to pay the price. You have to give up your family home,your farm, everything, but put a smile on your face because you are doing it for all Queenslanders.’ It isa bit like the pig and the cow and which one has to make the greatest sacrifice; it is okay for the cow ifone is just getting milk but it is a bit different for the pig who is being asked for some bacon. Thesepeople are being asked to sacrifice all. I am sure that they will sit in their homes during this stressfulperiod not knowing whether theirs is an affected property or not, because it is not clear at this point intime. The uncertainty and anger will take their toll. They will look at the people in the south-east cornerwatering their concrete, letting water flush down their toilets unnecessarily, the incredible waste thatoccurs where reticulated water is available and look at what they are going to lose and wonder about theworth of it all.


There has to be a balance between what this government is asking the people in the two areaswhere the dams are proposed to sacrifice versus the genuine return that they get on the property whenit is resumed and the responsibility that is placed on those who will benefit from these dams in terms ofthe responsible use of water. We have discussed recycling, desalination and water conservationmethods of all sorts, but the best message for those people who have their land taken is a genuinesense of appreciation from those people in the south-east corner who will benefit from the tragedy thatwill occur in Traveston and other places around that area.

The explanatory notes mention that the Local Government Association of Queensland, the SouthEast Queensland Water Corporation, the Council of Mayors SEQ and SunWater have all beenconsulted in developing this bill. They may have been consulted but it appears from quotes that otherspeakers have made, including the member for Callide, that they are not all happy about it. It is alwaysinteresting to read about the consultation process, but it would be good to know some of the objectionsof the stakeholders and their feelings about the whole process. I would like to quote an article on ABCNews Online which states in relation to Councillor Natoli of Maroochy—The Queensland Government has been accused of doing ‘too little, too late’ to shore up water supplies for the south-east corner. Maroochy Shire Mayor Joe Natoli says Premier Peter Beattie’s plan to establish a huge new dam in the Cooloola region willensure water supplies in the long-term, but the need is now. Councillor Natoli says the Government plans to start work on the dam in five years, too late to meet the current demand in south-east Queensland. ‘This solution here is not going to be of any benefit to the current crisis that the Brisbane community are facing, because if theydon’t get serious water in their dams over the next 12 months they’ll start to see incredible restrictions and hardship in thatcommunity’ he said.

I think what Councillor Natoli says is insightful. This is a huge announcement. It has causedtension between the councils in the area that is going to be inundated and the south-east cornermayors, who of course will support the provision of extra water for the south-east corner, particularly ifnone of their residents are directly affected in a negative sense. But he poses a very important question.Until the dam is completed, what water will be available to the south-east corner? Preservationmeasures alone will not be sufficient. I think it is a question that needs a genuine answer.

The other groups that speakers have mentioned are the primary producers and the primaryproduction land that will be lost in the inundation. You cannot have dams without losing land in terms ofaccess for production. The QDO’s Gympie branch met in late April and the chairman, MichelleAnderson, said that under the plans 20 million litres of milk or 10 per cent of local production will be lost.That is a very important issue also. We have had debates here about the dairy industry, in terms ofmaking our Queensland dairy industry competitive with the Victorian dairy industry and those southernones which have been bringing milk up to us for sale. For those people who lose production, it is alifestyle that probably has a family history in most cases. In some cases those families have only knownmilk production. So what strategies will be in place for retraining, for relocation, for redefining how thatfamily is going to make a living?

It is not just a matter of providing water, and it is not just a matter of resuming land and just payingthese people some money. It is much more heart wrenching than that. It is much more emotionallyseated than that. It should never be underestimated that buying land for a dam will disrupt the familiesaffected for many years to come. I say that because I have seen it in my own electorate. Everybodyagrees that it was necessary. Everybody agrees that it was a good thing in terms of the right strategy toraise the Boyne River Dam rather than impound the Calliope River, but we must never lose sight of thefact that there are families and people who are dislocated from what have been their historicconnections. It is very difficult to put a value on that and government processes do not put a value on it.It is all black and white. When we are debating dams in here and we are making political points, weshould remember that we are making points about these families. We are making points about theirfuture, and we are making decisions about what has been their past.

Ms LEE LONG (Tablelands—ONP) (9.13 pm): I wish to contribute to this debate on the WaterAmendment Bill 2006, which is about one of the essentials of life itself. This bill discusses the creation ofa new commission, a new bureaucracy, with the explanatory notes referring to cost sharing, pricing,transparent decision-making processes and a host of other bureaucratic and policy related issues. Butwe must not lose sight of the simple fact that water, essential to life and industry, is what we are reallydiscussing here. We also need to remember that each and every decision we make here is made underthe umbrella—indeed, under the rigid direction—of the National Water Initiative.

It is well worth outlining the background to the water policy in Queensland. That background wasset down in 1994 under Labor in Canberra and Labor in Queensland when the Council of AustralianGovernments, COAG, set down an agreement on the future direction of water reforms. This led to the1995 agreement to implement the national competition policy and related reforms which included water.National competition policy payments were made contingent on the implementation of these reforms.That, in turn, grew into the 2004 Intergovernmental Agreement on a National Water Initiative. It is thisprocess that is driving the new water charges that are crippling Queensland and crippling the bush. Weneed to remember that this is all being done under the COAG process headed up by the federal Liberal-


National government today. The Howard-Vaile endorsement of this initiative means those in the officialopposition in Queensland, the Nationals and the Liberals, are already signed-up believers in the sameprocess as much as those members on my left, the Labor Party.

The people of Queensland, including the people of the bush, will get the same rough deal fromthe Liberals and their akubra-wearing mates as they are getting from the ALP, and that is a shamefulstate of affairs. We have had a long litany of papers, discussions, proposals and so on regarding watermanagement in Queensland. A discussion paper on future rural water pricing for SunWater schemeswas released in November 2003. There was a review of the value of water announced in January 2004.A water resource charges discussion paper was released in July 2004. In August last year the Premierreleased the Queensland Water Plan 2005-10. But, even while all these discussions and reviews weregoing on, my electorate was battling through the Barron water resource planning process. What we gotafter nearly 10 years of so-called expert work was a document that claimed there was less water undersome farms than they were in fact already successfully extracting—a document that said there was noneed for any new dam in the area for at least the next decade; a document that said extra water wasavailable below Tinaroo Dam but that it was all set aside for the urbanised centre of Cairns; a documentthat said, while there was extra water available above the dam, no-one knew how to allocate it toirrigators. We got a document which said that area based licences were to be converted to volumetriclicences at a rate insufficient for viable farming. I ask: are there any friends of the farmers left anymore?

It is important to mention these things in the context of this bill to highlight the severely flawedtheories behind the way water is being managed in Queensland and the very poor results these policiesare delivering to Queenslanders. In terms of the allocation of above-dam water and the area based tovolumetric based conversion ratio, a local group of irrigators has been meeting for some years now withthe department of natural resources and mines. It sounds like a nice idea, but all it has done is give theimpression that the DNRMW is listening to stakeholders and trying to find solutions. In reality, thedepartment is committed to its own ideas and just will not budge. The result: no solutions; juststagnation.

For this bill to talk about transparent decision making and implementation frameworks for themanagement of water supply and demand in Queensland is, on past records, just a joke. It is fascinatingand horrifying in a way to see the growing disparity between how rural Queensland is dealt withcompared to the crowded south-east. We are told that we have to pay for the full cost of our water. Nomore subsidies, no more support; it is all going to be user pays for water, which is such an essential tolife itself. Yet here in the south-east there are subsidised theatres, subsidised museums, subsidisedsporting stadiums, free pedestrian bridges and subsidised public transport to name just a few. But in thebush it is ‘pay up and pay up some more’ for the full cost recovery.

This bill before us today is based on a call in the South East Queensland Regional Plan for reviewof institutional arrangements for water supply in the south-east. That review is examining planning forwater security, water sharing and entitlements; cost sharing, pricing and economic regulation; and assetownership and integration. I note in the explanatory notes the statement that one of the problems withthe current planning model is in fact that there is no entity clearly responsible for ensuring regional watersupply security. But there is. It is called the government of the day, more specifically the minister fornatural resources and his department. If there is a failure in this area, the responsibility still rests withhim. This is just ducking and weaving. This is an ALP government faced with the parched results of itsown water policy failures looking for an easy way out.

This bill will establish the Water Commission, described as an independent, expert based body ofat least three members with backgrounds in relevant areas. It will have four main roles: to undertakeregional assessment of options for water supply sources and demand management measures; tofacilitate and implement regional water security programs approved and published by the minister; toensure relevant parties comply with the regional water security program; and to set restrictions on usageand circumstances where it considers them necessary to ensure security of water supply. It may alsodeal with other matters referred to it by the minister.

It is an enormously broad range of functions, and its ability to ensure compliance brings it into theenforcement arena as well. It is not confined to the south-east. This commission will be able to addresswater security issues in other parts of Queensland if the minister wishes. I have to say, it begs thequestion: what will the minister and his department be left to do, and what value does any of its existingwork have, especially when it is the inadequacies of that work which prompted the creation of this newbody?

In my electorate we have a water resource planning process underway. The Barron Rivercatchment has gone through this process, as have some other river systems. It was eventually to applyto all and it was to address the kinds of things this commission is now going to do. What is happeninghere has little to do with water planning and everything to do with the Beattie government putting itself atarm’s length from its own repeated failures in this area. It will not be the Beattie government that makesthe harsh decisions. It will not be the Beattie government that slams down draconian restrictions. It willnot be the Beattie government that sends water rates soaring. It will be the Beattie government


standing, hand on heart, and claiming, ‘It is not our fault. We are only doing what the commission tells usis necessary.’ The Beattie government has been in power for almost a decade and the ALP for most ofthe past 18 years. So it is, shamefully, its fault.

There is also a very valid issue in the way this commission is to be handed a role in relation to theentire state. It comes out of a planning process confined to the south-east which is in response tospecifically south-east issues. Yet out of nowhere this bill may stretch its powers over the entire state.

I now turn to the provisions of this bill. Clause 3 amends section 25M relating to appointing aperson to carry out measures or achieve outcomes. It notes that the bill creates in section 360ZD(2) aseparate power for the commission to impose its own water restrictions on top of those that may beimposed by the water service provider. This is of great concern. We could now have two sets ofrestrictions, two sets of offences if breached and more confusion—another sign of how badly thisessential resource has been managed and will continue to be managed by the Beattie government.

Clause 9 inserts a new chapter 2A, which provides that the main purpose of this chapter is toensure the delivery of sustainable and secure water supply and demand management in south-eastQueensland and other designated regions. This will be achieved mainly by making and implementingregional water security programs and the establishment of this new commission. It is section 360Dwhich provides that the minister may publish a notice in the gazette designating a region for which thecommission is to perform its functions. The explanatory notes indicate that the south-east Queenslandregion will not require designation and that the commission can begin work there immediately after thecommencement of this bill. For the rest of the state, however, all it will take is a listing in the gazette andthis commission will be able to look at any aspect of water supply and demand management.

How will the commission be funded? Section 360F provides for an annual levy on each waterprovider for the purpose of funding the commission’s activities. The amount is to be set by regulation.The provider will, ultimately, pass on those costs to irrigators, the people on town water, familieswatering their lawns and industry. They will all be hit up to help pay for this new commission, this newbody, that is now being set up. Transparency? Equity? What a joke! When it comes to good government,when it comes to good resource management, it has been a long time between drinks for Team Beattie.

Mr LANGBROEK (Surfers Paradise—Lib) (9.24 pm): Before I begin, wearing my other hat as theshadow minister for public works, housing and racing I would like to acknowledge the Deputy Chairmanof the Gold Coast Turf Club, Brian O’Hara, and his wife, Lindy, and fellow friends Paul and RobynValmadre. Welcome to the Queensland parliament.

I rise this evening to speak to the Water Amendment Bill 2006, which amends the Water Act 2000to create the Queensland Water Commission. Some observers have noted that currently it is not clearwhich entity is responsible for ensuring regional water supply security. In fact, of the 19 water storagesin south-east Queensland, 12 different bodies share ownership. Any sort of uncertainty usually acts as abarrier to slow any process of change and action. So with respect to the objective to clarify and get onwith the job of fixing the water crisis in Queensland, the coalition will be supporting this bill, subject tosuggested amendments, as I know the shadow minister for natural resources and water has suggestedtoday.

I acknowledge the fact that in early March when the Premier met with the chair of the council ofmayors of south-east Queensland and other local government representatives from south-eastQueensland they agreed with the approach of establishing a commission—an independent, expertisebased commission of at least three members. The commission that this bill will establish will carry outregional assessments of options for water supply sources and demand management measures insouth-east Queensland from which it will develop water security options.

Division 6 of the bill allows for the minister to direct the commission to operate in parts ofQueensland other than the south-east region as well. In layman’s terms, this means that thecommission is an advisory body that will advise the minister on matters such as infrastructuredevelopment, retrofitting water-saving devices and other issues relating to water supply and demandmanagement. Importantly, under clause 9, it will also set restrictions on water usage in circumstanceswhere it considers it necessary in the interests of ensuring security of water supply. In layman’s terms,this means that taking that responsibility away from local councils will probably produce a moreconsistent approach to restrictions across the region. The commission is determinative rather thanadvisory with regard to being able to set these restrictions.

Let us keep this bill in perspective. This bill really has nothing to do with dams and everything todo with the fact that the Labor Party wants to look like it is doing something about water. This bill willallow the Premier to stand in front of the cameras and say, ‘The Queensland government has todaypassed the Water Amendment Bill,’ a cleverly labelled piece of legislation that implies it is amendingsomething about water. It is a triumph of spin over substance. The bill does not deal with a dam or apipeline. It is not going to build a dam or pipeline. This bill has been rushed in so Labor could look like itwas doing something.


During the Premier’s second reading speech on this bill when he rushed in just before lunch on21 April, the member for Burdekin and I were sitting in the House listening to the Premier’s speech andthe member for Burdekin drew the Speaker’s attention to the state of the House. Unfortunately, aquorum was not present. In what could only be described as a comment charged by the disappointmentthat his own party had not bothered to turn up in the House to support the bill’s second reading and incontradiction to the rhetoric that the Premier has been jamming down Queenslanders’ throats that theLabor Party is indeed focused on the water issue, he was so upset that his party was not in the Housethat he thought he may as well try to shift the focus to this side of the House, labelling our following ofproper procedure as ‘a bit pathetic’. He went on to call it ‘a stupid point’. What is pathetic here are twothings. The first is the disrespect shown by those opposite regarding the procedure of this House. Tosuggest that the following of those established rules is pathetic in an attempt to hide the fact that themajority of the Labor Party was absent from the House is indeed truly pathetic.

Mr Shine interjected. Mr LANGBROEK: I say to the member for Toowoomba North that I can always get 16. Secondly,

it highlights the lack of follow-through and priorities of the Queensland Labor Party with regard to wateras truly pathetic. Despite listening to the Premier and his members who arc up with ‘hear, hear!’ whenthe cameras are present in response to the supposed fact that Labor is addressing the water issue, theydid not even turn up to form a quorum and allow the Premier to present his second reading speech. Onwater Labor is all for show, and this bill is the latest illustration. This bill may achieve clarification whichis worthwhile, and it is a baby step in the right direction, but it has been introduced for the Labor Party’shealth rather than the health of the water system, which needs immediate and more significant care.

Attention shifting has not been the only shifting exercise related to this bill. The other shifting iscost shifting. Water service providers will pay for the new Water Commission via an annual levy asprescribed in section 7. In layman’s terms local council will foot the bill for the commission which meansthat ratepayers will undoubtedly be forking out more.

Noosa mayor, Bob Abbott, has said that it is the state government’s responsibility to fund thecommission. He is not alone in his objection to this cost shifting. The Lord Mayor of Brisbane, CampbellNewman, opposes the levy. Redcliffe mayor, Allan Sutherland, has said it is just another water thing hehas found out about second-hand. The executive director of the Council of Mayors SEQ, Jon Black,understood the matter was not agreed upon. The president of the Local Government Association, PaulBell, only remembers the issue being raised but not endorsed or discussed. These sentiments asreported in the Courier-Mail highlight that, whilst the approach of a commission was agreed upon in thehope of clarifying current uncertainty about who is responsible for what, slugging ratepayers with a billwas certainly not agreed upon.

I would like to use this opportunity to outline the suggested amendments to the legislation asrecommended by the director of Gold Coast Water. He points out that there is very weak reference towater quality currently in the bill. Furthermore, no reference has been made to flood mitigation despitethis issue being part of the local government submission. With regard to the restrictions the commissioncan pass, they can only be made with regard to climatic conditions and long-term water conservationrequirements. Gold Coast Water recommends that this needs to be expanded to encompass anystrategic risk to water security across the region such as terrorism, water quality and asset failure. It wasalso noted that the reporting arrangements for the commission are weak. The commission is notrequired to develop business continuity plans for strategic risks but is required to give advance notice ofits intent to implement restrictions.

The Queensland coalition understands that we have to fix the water crisis that this governmenthas, by waiting too long to act in respect of our drought, inflicted on Queenslanders. We have to fix it butlet us recognise that this commission, which will have a positive effect, is an administrative step. It is apolitically charged step. It is not a significant development in water infrastructure. It is not going to builda dam.

Yes, the commission will be able to advise the minister on infrastructure but that is all that isafforded. Funding issues and broader public interest considerations demand that the government makethe final decisions. Maybe this is further evidence that the Labor policy has not changed and it stillbelieves building dams is dinosaurean.

This bill to create a commission is just to show it is doing something. We can predict what is goingto happen in the coming months. It will start with, ‘We have created a commission to tell us about dams.’When the government still does not have a dam plan in six months it will say, ‘The commission is stillgoing to get back to us.’ When the dam is delayed it will say, ‘Oh, well, the commission said that site wasnot appropriate; we are now evaluating others.’ It will go on and on.

The commission will be the government’s fall-back position. It will point to it and say, ‘We set up acommission. We are doing something,’ but will not point out that the final decisions still lie with theminister and the government. The commission is afforded determinative water restriction impositionpowers but not with regard to infrastructure developments et cetera. I am not saying the commissionshould have those powers, but I do not want the commission to be used as the government’s scapegoat


when it does not deliver. At some stage we know that the government will say it is the federalgovernment’s fault. So we will have attention shifting, blame shifting, cost shifting, jurisdiction shiftingand we may even have realm shifting.

Mr Seeney: But no water. Mr LANGBROEK: I take that interjection from the shadow minister. No water, that is right. We

may even have realm shifting. The man who likens himself to Jesus Christ, the Premier, in dealing withCyclone Larry no doubt blames his father for the climate change that he has suddenly become aware ofafter eight years of inaction. The people of Queensland deserve better than this triumph of spin oversubstance.

Ms MALE (Glass House—ALP) (9.33 pm): It is my great pleasure to rise to support the WaterAmendment Bill 2006. Water resource planning is going to be recognised as the most vital planning thatcan be done for the ultimate benefit of the community. The adoption of the South East QueenslandRegional Plan last year ensures that planning for population growth can occur in a logical andsustainable manner, and with the necessary infrastructure also being planned, funded and built. TheSEQ Regional Plan identified the need for a review of the existing arrangements for water supply, andthis government is now acting on that.

The creation of the Queensland Water Commission will ensure a transparent decision-makingand implementation framework for the management of water supply and demand in Queensland. I ampleased that the council of mayors in south-east Queensland has worked with the government on thisprocess. Their goodwill and common-sense approach will be appreciated by generations to come.

The commission will comprise at least three members whose appointment will be made on thebasis of expertise and knowledge. Their job will be fourfold: firstly, planning for water security; secondly,ensuring compliance with a government approved regional water security program; thirdly, infrastructuredevelopment approved by the government; and, fourthly, applying water restrictions where thecircumstances require such action. The commission’s main objective is to ensure a sustainable watersupply for the region. Obviously they will have to consider what water restrictions need to be in place,especially during times of severe drought, which we are currently facing.

I am pleased that they will also be looking at demand management measures because this is stillgoing to be one of the keys for sustainable water supply. People need to look at themselves and theirhabits and see how they can best conserve this precious resource. Teach children about water and itsvalue. It is the sustenance of all life and should be treated as such. This government is taking thedecisions to fund an array of infrastructure and sources of supply—new dams, weirs, recycling,desalination, water-saving and collection devices.

I was pleased to see the announcement last week of funding of $20 million to be made availableimmediately for local residents to be able to ask council to do a water audit by inspecting their premisesfor leaking taps, pipes and cisterns. This government is committed to working with councils to helppeople cut water use by billions of litres every year. Water-saving shower heads, cistern weights and tapflow limiters can then be fitted where needed and leaking pipes fixed. Residents would obviously beexpected to pay a contribution towards the cost of up to $150 for each home, with the council sharingthe rest of the cost with the government.

The funding will also help commercial and industrial water efficiency with the requirement formajor water users to prepare mandatory water management plans and implement cost-effectiverecommendations. The development of the regional water security program by the Minister for NaturalResources, Mines and Water will become the responsibility of the Water Commission to implement. Thecommission will prepare a set of system operating rules for the region’s water grid. These rules willoutline how the water supply system should be managed in practice to ensure that the program can beachieved.

The commission will also be responsible for ensuring compliance with the security program,working with water providers to ensure optimal performance and facilitating infrastructure development.The Water Commission will be formally constituted as a new statutory authority within the portfolio of theMinister for Natural Resources, Mines and Water. As such, it will be subject to the normal range oflegislation applicable to statutory bodies such as the Financial Administration and Audit Act 1977.

I would like to put on record my thanks for the work of the Minister for Natural Resources, Minesand Water and the discussions I have been able to have with both the minister and the Premier and theirstaff on the issues surrounding water supply for my local area. The Queensland government iscommitted to providing greater water security for my local area through the South East QueenslandRegional Water Supply Strategy. We are committed to securing future water supplies for all users—households, communities, businesses, industry and the environment.

The announcement of the government’s decision to proceed with the Mary River Weir is in linewith the SEQRWSS and will improve water security for Noosa and Gympie. Last week’s announcementof a preferred dam site at Traveston is about fast-tracking infrastructure to mitigate the impact ofdrought, climate change and a booming population. The Traveston site has been selected because ofits potential to provide significant quantities of water to meet the needs of the growing population ofsouth-east Queensland.


Preliminary studies indicate that the storage could hold as much as 660,000 megalitres, boostingavailable supplies for growing communities living and working in the Mary Valley, Sunshine Coast andCaboolture through connection to the proposed water grid. A water treatment plant, pumping stationsand pipelines will be needed to convey the water to areas to be served.

Onsite investigations will include: social and landholder impacts, geotechnical appraisals of thesite, aquatic animal impacts, native vegetation impacts, cultural heritage impact, economic evaluation,reliability and performance, and riverine conservation values assessment. If Traveston is confirmed asthe best location, construction will be scheduled for completion by the end of 2011.

I have had local residents in my area contact me with their concerns about this new dam. Theyhave said that they would like to see all other water-saving and water-procuring measures implementedfirst, with a dam as a last choice or no dam at all. On the information that I have been provided and myunderstanding of the population increases and climate changes we have experienced, I do not believewe can wait for a couple of years to make the decision for a dam.

It should be noted that this dam will serve not just urban water users; it will be a vital resource forrural landholders and industry as well. Population projections indicate that the number of people living inthe south-east Queensland region could increase by one million in the next 20 years, with further growthbeyond that. This will place enormous pressure on our water supplies. Even with stringent waterdemand management measures being adopted, it will be necessary to provide large quantities ofadditional water.

As I have said, the government is also committed to cutting the excessive use of water, tocontinue investigating new technologies for recycling and desalination, reusing greywater on gardensand offering assistance to install water-saving devices and rainwater tanks. It is obvious that we musttake a regional approach to water planning. It is pleasing to see the south-east Queensland councilsand the Queensland government working together to form this new Water Commission.

This government is committed to ensuring that Queenslanders have access to a secure watersupply. This is another part of providing that security. I commend the bill to the House.

Dr DOUGLAS (Gaven—NPA) (9.40 pm): The details of the establishment of the QueenslandWater Commission have been raised. I suggest a new acronym for that commission: DAMNATION.Despite heated discussion about what this Labor government now says it intends to do, it says thatscience is not going to be part of it. I say to the members opposite that they do not understand theproblem and, as such, they cannot hope to resolve it.

Just as in health, the members opposite are facing a continuing crisis, this time with water, andthey are taking all the wrong options. The members opposite are trying to make decisions on the run.That is not the way to solve the problems. Brisbane’s water supply is at 30 per cent capacity and itsresidents are at level 3 restrictions. They are scared about the possibility of further rationing and maybeeven using standpipes in the future.

The Hinze Dam is full and the Gold Coast faces the real problem of serious flooding. If the areagets more rain, because the Hinze Dam has no flood mitigation the city will flood. In other words, thedam is full and the water is over the spillway. If there is more rain, the city will flood. I remind membersthat the river is silted. So most people’s properties will be inundated. Amazingly, at the same time wehave had a preliminary plan for a desalination plant at Tugun and a discussion about a pipeline that willgo two kilometres out to the sea.

This Water Commission will be funded by councils—not by the governments but by theratepayers. Irrigators will not be able to afford the water. No elected councillors will sit on thecommission. Why do we need a commission when we have a superbly functioning organisation inSEQWater? This appears to be a disingenuous attempt to massage through a government controlledentity that is a PR machine similar to most of the other entities that the government decides to takecontrol of.

Are members aware that only seven per cent of the water that goes from the Wivenhoe Dam isused by humans and that most of it ends up in the ocean? What is the definition of a genuine attempt toresolve this problem? I would say that science has to be involved. It would also have to involve people.It also has to make sure that they are informed along the way. The councils should be involved as theyare the ones that are being charged.

The government should pay for the pipeline linking the areas and build a grid. It should start doingthat now. The government should also fund discounts for water not used, which will save the public thecost for that water. Ultimately, the government can share that between all the suppliers. The governmentshould also get its hands dirty. It should get out into the shopping centres and schools and show peoplehow they can save water. It should also be practical about saving water. It should mandate rainwatertanks for all new homes and particularly recycling for sporting fields. The government should set adeadline for zero ocean outfalls and discharges. It should also mandate stormwater requirements toreduce flooding that causes damage to the ocean and damage to the rivers. That massive amount ofrainfall leads to huge degradation of both our rivers and our inner ocean. The government should alsobuild dams but base them on proper science. The Glendower and Wyaralong dams are ready to go. Thegovernment should build them.


Mr Palaszczuk: Is that based on science?Dr DOUGLAS: The science is there and the costs have been done. If the science of the Mary

River Dam is so good, why has the government not built it already? It has had two goes at it. Thegovernment spent $1.6 billion just to buy the land. That is not good economics and it defeats thescience.

Has the Labor government never heard of piping water from areas of high rainfall that occur inmajor downpours—in other words, from the north and, God forbid, south of the border? In this day andage, pumping distances of 1,000 kilometres are possible. We can do it with gas and we can do it withwater.

Do the members opposite think that the destruction of one major farming area in the Mary River isreally going to solve anything? Do they realise that that is where we grow our food? Do the membersopposite realise that that is the food that supplies our growing communities? In fact, the current estimateis that 16 per cent of our total food production occurs in that area. To build a dam in that area is not goodscience; it is bad science.

Similarly, the Premier has said that he will build the Logan River Dam. He says that it is a goodidea. But the science and the economics of it are flawed. The engineering has not even beenconsidered. The Premier will not deliver. He will say sorry. They are hollow promises. He is puttingpolitics ahead of tangible outcomes for Queenslanders. When the Premier says that Labor will buildthese dams, he is saying that he does not give a damn. Flawed science and flawed economics equalsno dams, because they are flawed sites and he is going to sink on flawed sites. The Premier’s strategyyields no benefits whatsoever to the community.

At a time when the government seeks to implement its Water Commission, it attaches to it twoflawed proposals. In other words, we have bad science on both of them and we will get bad outcomes.Curiously—

Mr Palaszczuk: Do you support the bill? Dr DOUGLAS: I am just saying that the attachment of the dams to the bill is the science of it.

Curiously, the member for Kallangur has highlighted the future of water pricing Mr Shine interjected.Dr DOUGLAS: This is relevant. This bill is about dams and about the science of them. I ask

members to remember that this bill deals with a new water pricing mechanism. It introduces a new levelof bureaucracy. The government should not build dams that the science says we should not build. Thegovernment should look at other proposals. It should adopt a scientific approach. It should pause. Theother day the minister talked about that funny four letter word called ‘wait’. I urge the minister to wait andapply the science to the proposals.

Mr ROGERS (Redcliffe—Lib) (9.47 pm): I rise to speak to the Water Amendment Bill 2006. Thepurpose of the bill is to amend the Water Act 2000 to establish a transparent decision-making bodycalled the Queensland Water Commission. The commission’s main area of responsibility is south-eastQueensland. However, it is assumed that in the future the commission will also be directed to operate inother regions of Queensland.

The commission will advise the minister on issues relating to water supply and demandmanagement, including infrastructure development, water-saving devices and water restrictions. Thecommission will also set objectives for water service providers, namely councils, and will overseeregional water security programs. The legislation also requires water service providers to pay the WaterCommission by an annual levy. The water service providers must also comply with the system operatingplans or face fines.

But let us not pretend: this bill has nothing to do with building dams, nothing to do with pipelines,nothing to do with water conservation and nothing to do with addressing the current water crisis. This billis driven by cost shifting, blame shifting and the typical showmanship media tactics of this disgracefulBeattie government.

To confuse the issue and to ensure that the Premier does not rock the boat in making firm andlong-term decisions on water resource preservation, the bill allows the commission, which is directed bythe minister, to impose its own water restrictions irrespective of any water restrictions that are already inplace. It also allows the commission to impose heavy fines on anyone who does not comply.

This mismanaged water crisis is another part of Labor’s legacy of inaction. This is just anotherchapter in the Beattie Labor government’s eight years of neglect of Queensland—like the QueenslandHealth crisis. Like the supposed resolution to that crisis, this bill is simply Beattie government window-dressing and posturing in the hope of fooling the public into believing that it has control overinfrastructure planning in this state.

This government had the ability to solve the problem, but it has left it too late. We on this side ofthe chamber want to know what it is going to say to the people when they go to their taps, turn them on,and nothing but mud comes out? As we have come to see and expect, the Premier, with all of hisshowmanship characteristics, has come out in a flurry and made a great big announcement about water

1544 Adjournment 09 May 2006

without one real minute of planning, only last-minute advice to council mayors and stakeholders for amedia show and a complete lack of substance in the associated legislation despite the promisescontained in the media hype.

Water is one of our most critical natural resources and, although Labor does not care abouthealth, Queensland was relying on Labor to take the wheel and actually make decisions to alleviate thecurrent crisis. We thought Labor had finally woken up and seen the need for statewide management ofwater. However, Labor failed to discuss or seek support by councils for any of the initiatives put forwarduntil it was too late.

The Premier’s legacy of inaction has failed Queensland and we have had enough. Thisgovernment’s neglect of our water resource and lack of proper planning is a recipe for disaster, and it isthe residents of Queensland who are going to be left high and dry—a bit like our dams actually.

Despite encouraging population growth—and every time the Premier gets on his feet we hearabout the 1,500 people coming to Queensland every week—this Labor government has failed tomanage this growth properly, leaving Queensland with a massive shortage in water storage. Thoseopposite should stop wasting our time with petty committee establishments, more bureaucracy and jobsfor their Labor mates. Now is the time to start building dams and pipelines. We must encourage waterconservation to ensure that Queensland has a water supply for the future so that we will always havewater to drink. The government needs to get the priorities right to protect our future by providing reallong-term and considered water amendments and strategies.

Debate, on motion of Mr Rogers, adjourned.

ADJOURNMENTHon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Leader of the House) (9.51 pm): I move—

That the House do now adjourn.

Western Hardwood IndustryMr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (9.51 pm): I rise tonight to bring to

the attention of the House once again the diabolical effect that will be felt by communities in myelectorate from the decision by the Beattie Labor government to close down the hardwood timberindustry in the state forests of the western hardwood region. As I have indicated in this House a numberof times, this is a decision that has been motivated simply by politics. It is an emotive political decisionthat has no basis in science and no basis in credibility, and cannot withstand any reasoned examination.Yet the communities of Monto and Mundubbera will pay a grave economic price for this government’ssubservience to the green movement.

There is no basis for the decision that has been made. The areas of state forests that are involvedwere reserved almost 100 years ago for the sustainable production of timber, and they have beensuccessfully managed for the sustainable production of timber over that long period of time. Lastweekend I had the opportunity to talk to some very senior members of my constituency who spent theirentire career working in those forest areas and who have a wealth of corporate knowledge of themanagement of those forest areas, and they can attest to the effort that has been put into ensuring thatthere has been sustainable management of those areas over a long period of time.

It is a great credit to those people that those areas that have been managed for the sustainableproduction of timber for almost 100 years are now considered of such high value that the conservationmovement wants to make them a reserve and protect them. The fact that they do have such value nowthat they are considered worthy of protection is a great credit to the people who have managed themover such a long period of time. That level of management could have continued. Of course, as themember for Southern Downs indicates, the government’s approach goes to almost absurd lengthsbecause the government wants to exclude beekeepers and horse riders. It wants to exclude all publicaccess to these areas and somehow lock them up and then create some sort of a wonderland whereeverything will be wonderful. The opposite will be true. These areas will suffer a build up of fuel to anextent that the inevitable wildfire will do more damage than the timber cutters, the recreational users andthe grazing leases have ever done. It is a diabolical decision that the government should be ashamedof.

Time expired.

East Timor Eye ProgramMs CROFT (Broadwater—ALP) (9.54 pm): For many people, the fact that on 20 September 1999

the Australian-led peacekeeping troops of the International Force in East Timor deployed to the countryto bring violence to an end is an event now that is somewhat in the back of our minds. For one GoldCoast ophthalmologist, Dr John Kearney, an independent East Timor has meant an opportunity to help

09 May 2006 Adjournment 1545

people in one of the poorest countries in the Asia-Pacific region and develop a program that would notonly aim to treat preventable causes of blindness but also train East Timorese doctors, nurses andoptometrists. Dr John Kearney is a well-known and highly respected ophthalmologist, whosecontribution to the ophthalmology profession nationally and, indeed, internationally is remarkable andinspirational.

In 2000, Dr Kearney partnered with good mate Dr Nitin Verma of Darwin to establish andcommence the East Timor Eye Program, a project that has garnered the support and assistance ofdoctors, nurses and optometrists from Broome, Darwin, Sydney, Perth, Hobart and the Gold Coast. TheEast Timor Eye Program comprises the component projects that include curative services, training andinfrastructure. Dr Kearney advises me that the curative services aim to treat preventable causes ofblindness and impaired vision through two eye clinics that have been established in Dili and Baucau,and further through outreach services in remote areas of East Timor.

A primary vision screening program for all East Timorese school children and their teachers hasalso been established. The aim of this project for Dr Kearney and his team is to provide spectacles tothose who need them and to also identify those patients who need tertiary treatment. The No. 1 aim isfor the East Timorese to become self-sufficient in administering eye care, and diagnosis and training oflocal East Timorese is well underway.

Uncorrected refractive errors and unoperated cataracts are the most common causes of curableblindness in developing countries. To address this, the East Timor Eye Program team travelled todistricts and villages to screen for eye disease. A week after the team head into these sometimesremote areas, volunteer ophthalmologists and operating nurses arrive at either Dili National Hospital,Baucau or Oecussi, where an eye clinic is set up with equipment and medication dispatched fromDarwin. The visiting eye team work into another week, during which time 50 to 150 patients havesurgery, over 1,500 cases are seen and over 1,000 pairs of glasses are supplied.

Since the program’s development, the ETEP team has seen more than 20,000 people, operatedon over 2,000 and issued 18,000 pairs of spectacles. The East Timor Eye Program is possible only bythe generosity of Dr Kearney, Dr Verma, their colleagues and the many volunteers who help them duringtheir visit. I wish to make particular mention today of Dr Kearney, his good friend and colleague DrVerma, Mr Bill Glasson, Kevin Vandeleur and nursing staff member Barbara Chandler, who all donatetheir time and expertise to helping the people of East Timor.

More financial assistance is always welcomed, of course, and people can send cheques care ofthe Royal Australasian College of Surgeons—East Timor Eye Program, 94 Nerang Street, Southport.

Time expired.

Kenmore State High SchoolDr FLEGG (Moggill—Lib) (9.58 pm): Kenmore State High School in my electorate is a victim of its

own success. It is a leading state high school in Queensland and now finds it has so many studentswanting to enrol that it has to cap the enrolments. Unfortunately, the government is proposing that weuse a nearest school criteria rather than community of interest. This threatens to severely disadvantagestudents in Karana Downs, Mount Crosby and possibly Moggill. Historically, all of these areas feed theirstudents to Kenmore high school. Their older brothers and sisters, their neighbours and friends have alltraditionally gone to Kenmore high school. Yet they are now threatened with a bureaucratic decision todraw a line on a map that would force them to go to another school where they have no historicalconnection.

The areas of Karana Downs and Mount Crosby in particular have a community of interest with thewestern suburbs of Brisbane. This was recognised when they were shifted to the Brisbane City Council,the state seat of Moggill in the western suburbs of Brisbane and the federal seat of Ryan, and,historically, most of the parents work in Brisbane.

The area of Karana Downs has been neglected by the state government and, in fact, its residentshave little to show for their taxes paid at a state level. They have absolutely no public transportwhatsoever and, tragically, in an appalling decision, this government sold land at Chuwar designated foreducational purposes, which could have been used to provide a high school for the area.

This is not a case of people trying to access a remote school because they perceive it to be abetter school. Kenmore State High School is their local high school. The state primary schools have fedtheir students into that high school for years. It is where they do their shopping. It is where their parentsgo to work. In just a brief time, hundreds of residents have signed a petition to oppose this arbitrarydecision to force students away from the school that their families have traditionally attended.

Members on this side of the House parliament will give the people of Karana Downs, MountCrosby and Moggill a guarantee that, if we are in government, they will have the choice of continuing toattend Kenmore State High School. It is only common sense that the governing factor should be theircommunity of interest and the areas to which they travel. This state government has failed to provide alocal high school in the Karalee, Mount Crosby or Chuwar areas.


Beaconsfield Mine RescueMr PEARCE (Fitzroy—ALP) (10.00 pm): As a former underground mine worker, on behalf of the

coalmining industry workers, their families and the broader community I pay tribute to every man andwoman involved in the rescue of Todd Russell and Brant Webb, after 14 days trapped one kilometrebelow the surface of the Beaconsfield gold mine. Dubbed by the miners themselves ‘The Great Escape’,Todd Russell and Brant Webb are survivors of a massive rock fall in the workings of an undergroundgold mine—a rock fall that killed workmate Larry Knight.

Since Anzac Day we have witnessed a journey through fear of lives lost, confirmation of a life lost,days of hope, jubilation at learning of the existence of life although trapped, days of expectation ofrecovery, disappointments, hope and finally jubilation and sadness. It has been a real cocktail of highsand lows that has captured the emotions of a nation.

Firstly, I offer my sincere and heartfelt thoughts of sadness and respect to the family of LarryKnight, who lost his life in the rock fall. Our thoughts are with the grieving families. Queenslandcoalmining families have experienced the sadness of loss of life in underground mine accidents and weknow what the families and the community of Beaconsfield will be going through at this time.

On this occasion, while there is grief there is also reason for celebration for what has to be one ofthe greatest ever stories of survival. Two mine workers, doing their job, were caught in a massivecollapse of rock. Within the first few seconds and minutes they would have been thankful for not beingkilled or seriously injured. Not knowing the fate of their work mate would have caused them greatconcern. Over many hours they would have endured secondary falls, the sound of surrounding stratabeing relieved of the pressures that come with such a fall and that would radiate into the surroundingrock.

As the hours passed and turned into days, Todd and Brant would have become increasinglyanxious, simply not knowing the extent of the fall, how far under the rock fall they were, the isolation, thesilence and the dangers that presented for the rescuers. However, not for one minute would they havegiven up hope of being rescued. They would have known in their own hearts, through that powerful bondthat exists between underground miners, that their mates would not abandon them. They would haveunderstood that, dependent on the size of the fall and the associated dangers, it would take time andthat all they had to do was to stay calm and be patient. They knew that rescue teams would go aboutrecovery in an efficient and safe way, and they knew that they would come for them.

Over the last week we have heard of the courage and determination of the mine rescue teamsand support networks. We pay tribute to those miners who have worked under extremely difficultconditions in a confined space drilling, blasting and chipping away inches at a time, through rock said tobe five times harder than concrete, to make a tunnel which would allow Todd and Brant to escape whatwas potentially a tomb and allow them to walk free into the waiting arms of loved ones.

Like so many this morning and throughout this memorable day, I have been moved by the footageof the mine site. To see those men reunited with their families in front of those who made their escapepossible reminded me of the value of life and how often we take it for granted.

Rainwater TanksMr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (10.03 pm): At long last the state government has

acknowledged that the supply of water is an essential service that the state government must be directlyinvolved in, just like the supply of electricity, and that this requires a coordinated and regional approachto ensure the supply of regular and reliable water to consumers. On 25 March 1999 in this veryparliament I moved a motion that the state government investigate and, if possible, make provision inthat year’s budget for a rainwater tank rebate program to encourage water conservation in Queensland.That motion received unanimous support from all members of parliament. The minister at the timesaid—One of the things that the proposition put up by the member for Nicklin would impact on is reticulated water, because that is thehighest cost water in the State. In terms of how strategic we need to be, it is my view that we need to start where the water is mostexpensive, because that is where the greatest gains of this kind of investment would be captured. One would start in those areaswhere the cost of delivering water is the highest. One would provide incentives for people to use the untreated water that is caughtin rain tanks. Lots of people in rural areas use it for everything already, including drinking, and do so in an entirely healthy way.

In the lead-up to this year’s state budget I take this opportunity to again call on the stategovernment to seriously consider a provision in this year’s state government budget to provide anincentive for Queenslanders to be more directly involved in water conservation by the provision of arainwater tank with all new dwellings and an incentive for existing home owners to install rainwatertanks.

At the moment, a number of local councils in Queensland provide incentives or requirements forresidents in their respective shires to install rainwater tanks as a tool to assist in rainwater conservation.I do not believe that the state government should continue to simply leave it up to local councils toprovide these incentives for residents in Queensland to install rainwater tanks.


For the benefit of all members, I table a summary of incentives that currently operate in theAustralian Capital Territory, where its government provides for the installation of appropriate rainwatertanks. The Western Australia government’s Waterwise rebate schedule is available for the purchaseand installation of new tanks. The Victorian government has a Watersmart gardens and home rebatescheme. If other state governments in Australia can provide rebates in this form as incentives for peoplein their states to install rainwater tanks, I believe that it is high time that the Queensland government didlikewise, especially after 2004 when our own government investigated issues such as the large-scaleintroduction of rainwater tanks in Queensland.

I also note that on 18 December last year, Sunday Mail journalist Daryl Passmore reported onrainwater tanks. He quoted Councillor Abrahams as saying—By using a rainwater tank for flushing the toilet, washing clothes, watering the garden and hot water systems, the averagehousehold could reduce their annual use of mains water by 30 to 40 per cent with a 3000-litre tank.

Again, I urge the government to seriously consider this suggestion. Time expired.

Anzac DayMrs CARRYN SULLIVAN (Pumicestone—ALP) (10.06 pm): Annually we commemorate Anzac

Day on 25 April and this year we saw unprecedented crowds paying their respects at a large number ofceremonies. I attended several ceremonies on the day and dedicated a poem written for me by myfriend Ruth Inglis, whose poetry I have mentioned in here before. I was inspired by the calibre ofspeeches by young students on the day.

I want to share with members part of a speech made by 12-year-told Sarah Tiplady, a year 7student from Saint Michael’s College in the Pumicestone electorate. She writes—You may well ask what relevance could Anzac Day have for me. What could I possibly learn or appreciate from an event thatoccurred over 90 years ago on a lonely stretch of beach in Turkey? My perception of war has been shaped by several influences. Firstly the stories recounted by my parents and grandparents aboutthe war experiences endured by family members—past and present. Both of my grandfathers enlisted in the Air Force in 1943 at the age of eighteen—one in Australia and one in England. My great-grandfather fought in the Australian Army in Egypt in 1941 and to this day my Nan has letters he wrote to her with big holes inthem where the censors had cut out anything that might give away the position of the soldiers. My great uncles were held prisonerin Changi, in Singapore. In my view what they did along with many others took incredible courage and self-sacrifice. But, they say, they enlisted becausethey wanted to protect the country and families they loved. Fortunately, all of my relatives were lucky enough to come home from the various conflicts. I realise now that coming home alive doesn’t always mean the end of the war experience. Many veterans ... endure many ...medical conditions as a direct result of their military service. This can have a profound effect on their families also.

...The second major influence on my current understanding of war has been from the activities we have undertaken at school. At thispoint in my life, adolescence beckons and I am excited about the next phase and where the rest of my life will lead me. I wasdisturbed to discover that so many of the soldiers who lost their lives were only a few years older than me. Private Jim Martin signed up ... on April 12, 1915. He gave his age to the recruiting officer as18 ... He was in fact just fourteen.Private Martin landed at Gallipoli on September the eighth ... On October 25 he was evacuated to a hospital ship suffering fromtyphoid fever ... That night ... he died from heart failure. He is believed to be the youngest ANZAC and ... only two years older thanme ... After hearing the story of private Jim Martin you may contemplate why such young Australians would sign up. I have discoveredfrom reading diary extracts that some found it their duty to go, others thought it would be exciting, there were some who thought itwould shame them if they did not join and there were those who believed that it would give them an opportunity to see the world.Whatever their reason for going it did not prepare them for the horrific reality that was Gallipoli.

Currumbin Valley, Development ApplicationMrs STUCKEY (Currumbin—Lib) (10.10 pm): I rise tonight to once again request the Minister for

Environment, Local Government, Planning and Women exercise her powers and call in the Co-You/Devine development, which was approved by Gold Coast City Council last month despite enormouspublic discord from residents of Currumbin Valley and surrounds. I also appeal to the Premier to showsome fairness and do the same.

On 20 February 2006 I wrote to the minister at the behest of over 200 residents who attended apublic meeting requesting her urgent consideration be given to supporting the extensive environmentaland lifestyle concerns they have over this development. Further to my adjournment speech on 1 March,I sent another letter to the minister on 2 March 2006 specifically seeking her intervention with regard tothis development and requesting her to exert her powers by calling in the application with a view torejecting it.

Disappointingly, to date I have not received a reply regarding this 2 March correspondence. Yet allaround the south-east region developments are being called in by the Premier and/or the minister for


predominantly environmental reasons. In calling in Attunga Heights Pty Ltd’s development in NoosaHeads the minister states as part of her reasons—The site forms part of a state wildlife corridor and bioregional wildlife corridor ... any development at the site must be controlled toprotect the habitat resources and maintain the permeability of this site to wildlife.

This is exactly why the Currumbin Valley needs to be preserved, but the minister continuallyignores this issue and the fact the area in Currumbin falls outside the urban footprint of the much toutedSouth East Queensland Regional Plan.

Another situation was reported only yesterday in the Courier-Mail. It was reported that a fortnightago the Supreme Court found the minister had exceeded her authority in rejecting the Emerald Towersdevelopment for inner-city Brisbane. The latest intervention by the minister saw her wresting controlfrom council of a development application in Stafford declaring it a matter of state interest. This hasbeen further criticised publicly as a situation which opens the government to charges of conflict ofinterest as it stands to benefit.

An earlier example was the intervention by the Premier when he called in the Montville Linksdevelopment, supposedly based on predominantly environmental grounds. If the minister actually tookthe time to understand the environmental impact of the Devine development she would realise she iscontradicting herself and risks losing credibility if she fails to use her powers to halt this totallyinappropriate development earmarked for the valley. I challenge the minister to stand by her commentmade earlier today in the House that the EPA will be at the discussion table mitigating environmentalimpacts so far as is possible.

During question time today the minister defended the Premier’s verdict to call in Montville Linksas ‘a wise decision indeed because the south-east Queensland plan is for real’. She said—We mean business in terms of that south-east Queensland plan. It was the Premier’s view, and quite correctly so—

to call it in. The Devine application was passed by council less than two months ago, well after theadoption of the SEQ plan. Such inconsistent behaviour smacks of favours for mates. Why should we besurprised? After all, Terry Mackenroth sits on the Devine board.

Death of Mr WCR HarveyMr WILSON (Ferny Grove—ALP) (10.13 pm): I want to pay tribute tonight to the late Roy Harvey.

The Premier and other speakers spoke earlier today about Roy Harvey’s outstanding contribution topublic office and I want to briefly relate to the House the contribution he made to the local area,particularly in the Mitchelton part of my electorate of Ferny Grove.

In the early 1950s Brisbane was a rapidly developing city faced with many challenges. Thechallenges were to provide basic services to the community that today we take for granted, for examplethe sealing of local roads in what was then the outer suburb of Mitchelton. These initiatives were ofenormous benefit to the community. The sewering of the suburbs was another service that Roy foughtfor. But it was the provision of other social infrastructure in the Mitchelton area that Roy Harvey will beremembered for.

In the 1950s and 1960s there were not a lot of activities for young people in these rapidlydeveloping suburbs. As a result, a number of young people got themselves into trouble. Roy set aboutand worked with the local communities to provide facilities that would allow young people to becomeinvolved in activities that would break the boredom and today facilities like the West Mitchelton JuniorRugby League Club and the Mitchelton Youth Club stand as a reminder of Roy’s contribution toMitchelton.

In his second stint in the council Roy was responsible for providing the Mitchelton Library—another tremendous facility for the Mitchelton community. On a wider level, Roy Harvey, as BCC mayor,promoted a scheme that required businesses contracting to council to train BCC apprentices in ‘theways of private industry’. A former local resident and good friend of mine has told me how much thisscheme helped him and many, many other young apprentices at the time.

Roy Harvey worked, like all other aldermen, from home. He had to have someone answer thephone when he was not at home, someone to assist in answering correspondence and doing the manyother things that elected representatives are called upon to do and, just for good measure, also lookafter the kids. In those days these duties fell to the wife of the alderman. In Roy’s case he was lucky,because he had a truly wonderful supportive wife, Pearl, who was a tower of strength to Roy and notonly performed the duties of an unpaid electoral secretary but also assisted Roy—

Mr Schwarten: They used to say, ‘Go straight to the top: see Pearl.’ Mr WILSON: That is right. She assisted Roy in his election campaigns as well as ran the Harvey

household. Although I did not know Roy personally, I know him very well from the fine reputation that hehas in the local area for his excellent contribution over many, many years to the community in his role asalderman. He will be fondly remembered, and I offer my sincere condolences to his wife, Pearl, andfamily.


Longreach Airport UpgradeMr JOHNSON (Gregory—NPA) (10.16 pm): I wish to bring to the notice of the House tonight the

intention of the Longreach Shire Council to seek expressions of interest for significant funds from thefederal government’s Sustainable Regions Program from members of the Darling Matilda Way areaconsultative committee to upgrade the Longreach airport at a cost of some $10 million to $12 million.This is in the interests of the whole of the region—a promotion through a central pivot. When I say ‘acentral pivot’, Longreach is the central pivot in the central west and it is absolutely paramount that theother centres support this project in question, which they do.

The proposed airport upgrade project, estimated at $10 million to $12 million, hinges on theavailability of an involvement in the project by a proven commercial airport operator. The LongreachShire Council has entered into consultation with Queensland airports, and the discussions are ongoing.

Tourism studies and strategies have identified the need to develop this end of the market so thatwe can get larger aircraft into Longreach to promote the central west and the wider regions and thebyways off the Matilda Highway for both domestic and international tourists. When we look at what isgoing on in places like Broome, Darwin, Alice Springs, Cairns, Townsville and Rockhampton, it is veryimportant that we recognise that need to upgrade.

The project involves bringing together a consortium of players including the council, federalgovernment, state government and private enterprise to work out a far-reaching plan to ramp up theseair services—but not, I must say, at the expense of the existing air services. They are sacred to central-western Queensland and to south-western Queensland—services such as those that go into Charlevilleand ultimately on to Birdsville and Bedourie and on up to Boulia. It is paramount that we see theretention of the air services that go into Longreach, Barcaldine, Blackall and Winton. I know that thecontracts are not far off coming up again.

The immediate challenge for council is in preparing the full submission for the funding. It isexpected to cost in excess of $100,000. The Remote Area Planning Development Board, under theleadership of Councillor Gary Peebles from Aramac, is certainly supportive of this. The Remote AreaPlanning Development Board encompasses some 11 shires in the central west. I call on the stategovernment and the Minister for Transport and Main Roads, the Hon. Paul Lucas, to throw his supportbehind this program because it is so vitally important to the promotion of not only the central west butalso tourism in Queensland in general. With high fuel prices there are many people choosing to fly now,and they can get cheaper flights into places like Brisbane. Last week saw the first of the three flights aweek out of Sydney direct to Rockhampton by Virgin Blue. This is all advantageous to Queensland, andI believe the promotion of the upgrade to the Longreach airport will further complement that.

Wildlife Warriors WorldwideMs MALE (Glass House—ALP) (10.19 pm): It gives me great pleasure to rise this evening to

inform the House of an outstanding initiative that began with Steve and Terri Irwins’ ConservationFoundation and has grown into Wildlife Warriors Worldwide. Everyone here knows of the Irwins’absolute dedication and passion for Australian animals which has grown into a desire to protect animalsall over the world. They know they cannot do it themselves, and they remain committed to involvingother caring people across the globe to support the protection of injured, threatened or endangeredwildlife, from the individual animal to an entire species.

Steve and Terri Irwin are now involved with Wildlife Warriors as the patrons, and back that up withsupport from Australia Zoo to cover all of the administration costs of Wildlife Warriors Worldwide. From apractical viewpoint, this allows Wildlife Warriors to apply every single cent that they receive fromcorporate supporters and public donations directly to the conservation and preservation of wildlife. Onehundred per cent of every single dollar goes straight to helping animals.

I spent a very productive couple of hours last week with Mr Michael Hornby, the ExecutiveManager of Wildlife Warriors Worldwide. We spoke about the Warriors’ objectives, which are to protectand enhance the natural environment; to provide information and education to the public and raiseawareness of wildlife issues; to undertake biological research; and to research, recommend and act inthe protection of threatened or endangered species. Wildlife Warriors also want to raise a million dollarsto help in the conservation of tigers, elephants and other animals. They are also very interested in thespotter catcher project as it relates to development in urban areas, and they are looking at establishingtheir membership base to up to 20,000 people.

They have many excellent projects underway including the Australian Wildlife Hospital, which isbased at Australia Zoo at Beerwah; species and habitat conservation in Asia; crocodile rescue andresearch, which is international; community education, which is international; and emergency wildliferesponse including the aid provided after the tsunami hit Banda Aceh and after Cyclone Larry.

The Australian Wildlife Hospital and Rescue Unit collects sick, injured and orphaned koalas andother wildlife, and provides care and rehabilitation in a state-of-the-art facility before releasing them backinto the wild. Gail Gipp, who manages the hospital, is one of the most dedicated, hardworking people I


know. She stays at the hospital 24 hours a day and is on call all night to tend to the animals in thehospital. This superb veterinary facility has an intensive care room and a laboratory with full-timeveterinarians, vet nurses and volunteers. They all do a magnificent job, and their care and compassionis immeasurable.

Last week the Wildlife Warriors put on an innovative fundraising drive—‘The Corporate Jungle’.Sixteen local businesspeople entered ‘The Corporate Jungle’ to raise much-needed funds for tigerconservation. Their goal was to raise $1,000 each in 30 minutes of telephoning or face the penalty—being dumped in a pile of elephant poo!

Mrs Carryn Sullivan: I sponsored that.Ms MALE: The donation total was over $23,000. I am glad that the member for Pumicestone

sponsored it. I also sponsored Elise Martin for $100 to go towards her $1,000 total, thus saving her froma pile of poo. It was a light-hearted way to raise funds and awareness of a very serious issue.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind members that they can make a tax deductibledonation to the Warriors. Just check out the website on www.wildlifewarriors.org.au. I am hopingthrough Wildlife Warriors people can get involved, support our wildlife work and share in our dream.Australia Zoo’s philosophy of conservation through exciting education has given Wildlife Warriors a solidfoundation to build upon, and the organisation has become a conduit for achieving the zoo’s globalconservation objectives.

Time expired. Motion agreed to.The House adjourned at 10.22 pm.

Documents

2006 05 09 WEEKLY · 2006-05-16 · 09 May 2006 Motion of Condolence 1433 He was elected to the Mackay City Council in 1967 and was appointed deputy mayor and member of the Mackay