Ilrgislutinr 1\ssrmhly. - Parliament of Victoria

$: Ilrgislutinr 1\ssrmhly. - Parliament of Victoria$
638 Questions [ASSEMBLY.] without Notice.

The authority has advised the Water Commission that on 11th February, 1976, it had received an application from the owners of the property referred to for a sewerage connection. This was subsequently considered by the authority, which furnished a reply on 27th February, 1976, setting out the conditions under which a s'ervice could be provided.

It is understood that this is a case where, because of the extreme shortage of loan funds for sewerage, the authority would take advantage of recent amendments to the Sewerage Districts Act, as a result of the enactment of the Local Government (Subdivision of Land) Act 1973, to have part of the cost of the required works met by a direct capital contribution by the property owner concerned.

Ilrgislutinr 1\ssrmhly. Thursday, May 6, 1976.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler) took the chair at 11.4 a.m., and read the prayer.

INCORPORATION OF MATERIAL IN "HANSARD".

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): Order! Last night during the debate on the motion for the second reading of the Supply (1976-77, No. 1) Bill the honorable member for Rodney sought and obtained leave to have incorporated in Hansard two graphs in relation to matters concerning the Shire of Rochester. It now appears that it is not technically possible for the graphs to be so incorporated. The honorable member has supplied to the Chief of Hansard similar information in a tabular form which is capable of incorporation. If it is the will of the House, the latter material win be incorporated in Hansard in lieu of the graph. I have perused it; it is quite clear, and if leave is granted it will be incorporated in Hansard in the same place where the graphs would have appeared. Is leave granted?

Mr. WILKES (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Yes.

ABSENCE OF MINISTER. The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth

Wheeler): I have been advised that the Minister of Agriculture is absent from the House.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE. POLICE INQUIRY.

Mr. WILKES (Northcote): Is the Premier aware that the cost of the police inquiry is now more than $500,000, and could well reach $1 million? If so, will he consider allowing complaints against the police to be dealt with by a tribunal or some other body that is less costly and more independent, perhaps in line with the first report of the Law Reform Commissioner, or alternatively, in line with the British Home Office report on complaints against members of the Metropolitan Police Force in London?

Mr. HAMER (Premier and Treasurer): Two matters are involved in the question of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The first is the astronomical cost of the present police inquiry, in which I take it the honorable member includes the cost of counsel on both sides and witnesses.

Mr. WILKES: Yes. Mr. HAMER: There is no doubt

that when a State or any Government embarks on an inquiry of this sort, the cost of it cannot be predicted accurately in advance. A number of allegations, statements and so on have been made in the course of the inquiry which were not made at the beginning. Nevertheless I understand that the inquiry is approaching its conclusion. From a financial point of view, as Treasurer I am very glad to hear that, but once an inquiry of this type is begun, one cannot rightly restrict the opportunity of people to make their complaints to it. In many cases the complaints are entirely groundless, but they must be shown to be so.

The inquiry was based on grounds which were originally investigated by a barrister, before the inquiry was

Questions [6 MAY, 1976.] without Notice. 639

embarked on, to ascertain whether there was reasonable cause for an inquiry to be undertaken. So we have been through a process, before reaching this point, of trying to ensure that the spending of public moneys on the inquiry could be justified. I am surprised at the cost of the inquiry, and I think everyone else in the community is surprised.

The second part of the question was asked because in any country a number of complaints are made about the Police Force, and they have to be investigated. The system that operates in Victoria at present is the one recommended by Colonel Sir Eric St. Johnston in his report. The system works in other countries, including Great Britain, and it involves a preliminary investigation being undertaken by a senior police officer. Here again, many of the complaints are entirely frivolous and mischievous. Provision is made that if the complainant is not satisfied with the response from the senior police officer, he can appeal to a magistrate. This is the system which was instituted in Victoria several years ago. I have heard very few complaints about it, but if the honorable member for Northcote has any complaints, he should refer them to the Chief Secretary for further perusal. However, I should have thought that at present the system is working quite well.

REFRESHMENT SERVICE ON " VINELANDER ".

Mr. A. T. EVANS (Ballarat North): I ask the Minister of Transport whether the Victorian railways have completed their investigations, at my request, into the proviSion of a refreshment service on the Vinelander between Melbourne and Mildura, and if so, what form that service will take.

Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport): I am aware that the honorable member has referred to this matter previously. Recently I had cause to make inquiries about it and the information that was given to me was this: Firstly, because of

the physical need to change the construction of the carriage, it would take about six months before such a service would be available. I was not satisfied with that answer and asked the Railways Board to see if that aspect could be expedited. Secondly, the' service would not provide a full meal but a buffet service of pies and so on. After I receive the additional information which I have now sought, I shall let the honorable member know.

TECHNICAL SCHOOL COUNCILS.

Mr. ROSS-EDWARDS (Leader of the National Party): I direct my question to the Minister of Education. I refer to the serious overdraft position of many technical school councils in Victoria. Has the Minister any plans for making special allocations to these councils in the near future"

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education): This refers to the expenditure of money from the school maintenance grant and the technical schools system. From memory, there was an approximate increase of about 11 per cent to 12 per cent in the grant available this year. Some schools are at present experiencing difficulties in meeting payments, but the Government believes this can be overcome in two different ways. Firstly, the technical and further education reimbursement funding will be available to a number of these schools very shortly, and further adjustments will be made to the original maintenance grant in the light of recent wage awards.

One particular country technical school is in the red to the tune of $2,000 at the moment, and it will be receiving a cheque very shortly for $4,000. The particular financial situation of each technical school will be examined in detail so that those schools which are in financial difficulty will be assisted before the end of the financial year.


DAYLIGHT SAVING.

Mr. EDMUNDS (Ascot Vale): Is the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation aware of the very substantial vote cast in the New South Wales elections for the continuation of daylight saving? If so, is he also aware that there are proposals to extended daylight saving on the eastern seaboard of Australia from the present hours for a further hour or an hour and a half? Will the honorable gentleman consider these proposals and make recommendations to the Government in respect of extending the hours of daylight saving in Victoria?

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler) : I hope this question is correctly directed to the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation.

Mr. DIXON (Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation): The advice that I was given is that daylight saving affects many departments in many ways. It would certainly affect the recreation of the people of Victoria. In that way it would seem to me to be properly addressed, but perhaps it should go to the Premier. That is my view.

The SPEAKER: Order! If the honorable gentleman considers that he can answer the question and it comes within the jurisdiction of his department, he can do so.

Mr. DIXON: My department has observed the resounding vote in favour of daylight saving which occurred at the referendum in New South Wales. My department is in favour of extending the days on which daylight saving applies; that would be to bring it back to the first week in October rather than the last week in October, and to extend it forward to the last week in March rather than the first week in March.

I shall ask my department to look at the proposal raised by the honorable member for a further extension of hours of particular days, and I will make a report to the Government on those matters.

BOXING. Mrs. PATRICK (Brighton): I ask

the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation whether any progress has been made in the inquiry into additional safeguards for professional boxers.

Mr. DIXON (Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation): My department has investigated three matters which are related to professional boxing. The first concerns a reduction in age, and that is rejected. The age will remain at eighteen years.

Mr. TREZISE: What about amateur boxers?

Mr. DIXON: This concerns professional boxers. Amateurs are able to box under the jurisdiction of the Victorian Amateur Boxing Association. Two safeguards have been investigated, one being the use 'Of head guards. I am advised by officers of my department who have talked to many people within boxing and also to the Australian Sports Medical Association, that head guards are not regarded as particularly useful, that the concentrati'On of the boxer is destroyed, and that they really only protect against cuts. A boxer wearing a head guard could still be knocked out. They have been tried in two States of the United States 'Of America but their use has been disc'Ontinued. Therefore, we would reject the use of headguards as a safeguard.

The other proposal was that gloves should be more heavily padded. Again, alth'Ough there would be some extra protection, it is considered, particularly in the medical association, that the heavier weighting of gloves would cause the boxer to tire more easily and this might mean that he would suffer more punishment. I am not certain whether that is a logical explanation, but I have asked Dr. Refshauge, of the Australian Sports Medical Association, to investigate the latter proposal more fully. At this stage there is no suggestion by the Government that it will take a'ction on any of those three matters.


EDUCATION FUNDS. Mr. WHITING (Mildura): Can the

Minister of Education inform the House whether a decision has yet been made regarding the formula for providing both 'capital and recurrent funds to the eleven educational regions throughout the State? If not, when does he expect a decision will be made on this formula, and will that formula be made available to honorable members of this House?

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education): A recommended formula has been completed, but everything really depends 'On the allocation of loan funds at the Australian Loan Council meeting in the middle of the year.

Mr. WHITING: That does not affect the formula, does it?

Mr. THOMPSON: The final splitup between the regions depends largely on the final amount allocated on the decision of the Loan Council. Early in the new financial year details of the allocation will certainly be made available, but it may be necessary to change the formula slightly in the light of the final decision the Loan Council on the allocation of funds between the States, and particularly to Victoria.

TECHNICAL SCHOOL COUNCILS.

Mr. WILTON (Broadmeadows): I direct a question t'O the Minister of Education, following the point raised by the Leader 'Of the National Party. Will the Minister give an assurance that the additional funds that he indicated will be provided for technical schools which are in financial difficulties will be sufficient to discontinue the need to charge students class material fees, and m10re particularly to avoid the need for teachers to leave class-rooms and scrounge around amongst industry for material to ensure that classes are able to continue?

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education) : The amount of money that is likely to be made available over the next two months will be

of the order of $1·08 million in fee reimbursement under the technical and further education funding scheme, and approximately $800,000 to meet the 6·4 per cent wage increase. That money will be spread throughout our technical college system. At this stage the Government believes it will be sufficient, but the position of different colleges varies. Some have managed to get by with the 11 per cent increase last year which, when worked out in greater detail, appears to be a 16 per cent increase. Others are in financial trouble. These colleges will benefit from the approximate $1·8 million of additional funds that will be made available over the next two or three months, and I believe they will be able to avoid the types of things to which the honorable member objects.

MENTAL HEALTH EXPENDITURE.

Mr. EBERY (Midlands): I ask the Assistant Minister of Health whether the Minister of Health is aware of the report compiled by two psychiatrists which states that Victoria is disadvantaged in the care of mental health, whether the honorable gentleman has had the opportunity of having the report checked, and what action is proposed.

Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health) : I assume that the report referred to by the honorable member is the one that has been compiled by two psychologists at Queensland University, Dr James Gardiner and Dr. Paul Wilson, to which some considerable pUblicity has been given in the press in recent days.

To my knowledge, the Minister of Health has not had the opportunity of studying the report and certainly not of checking the findings which have been revealed. However, there are several matters pertaining to the report and its findings, and the honorable member's question concerning what action should be taken, on which I should inform the House.

I understand that the criticism within the report of Victoria's mental health services is


directed towards a comparison of the percentage increase in expenditure on mental health between the States over the ten-year period from 1963 to 1972. The report also highlights the fact that over the ten-year period, in each year Victoria spent-

Mr. WILKES (Northcote): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, you have consistently ruled that answers to questions should not be debated by Ministers, that short and precise answers should be given where possible, and that in no circumstances should the answer be the subject of a debate by the Minister.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): Standing Order No. 127 states-

In answering any question a member shall not debate the matter to which the same refers. I ask the Minister to be as brief as he possibly can and not to debate the matter.

Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health) : I arn not debating the report. I am drawing the attention of the House to some relevant matters pertaining to the question that has been asked.

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition): On a point of order, the question was fairly short and sharp, and the Minister is now obviously using the time to canvass the views of departmental officers on the report.

Mr. JONA: That is not true. Mr. HOLDING: Of course it is, and

it is an abuse of question time. If the Minister wants to make a statement at some length on the Government's attitude to the report, he has other ways and means of doing it. The Minister should not be using question time to debate an issue in a report which has not yet been made available to the House and is not the property of the House.

The SPEAKER: I cannot agree that the Minister is deliberately taking up the time of the House-I do not think that is exercising his mind at ~ll. However, it does appear to me

that the Minister is now debating the matter because the honorable gentleman said that he had not seen the report which had been compiled. Therefore, taking that into consideration, the answer should be very brief and not canvass matters that are in a report which the Minister has not seen.

Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health): As I am not permitted to answer the question in the way in which I wish it to be answered--

Mr. HOLDING: The Minister cannot answer it because he has not seen the report.

The SPEAKER: Order! The Assistant Minister of Health is now endeavouring to answer the question and I am sure he will do so in terms which the Chair requires him to use.

Mr. JONA: In accordance with your ruling, Mr. Speaker, I will not proceed to answer the question but I shall simply conclude by saying that the publicity which has been given to this report has, I believe, taken the report completely out of context. It has levelled criticism against certain aspects 'Of Victoria's mental health services, but when the report is read in more detail it will also indicate the advances which have been made in this State.

OFF-SHORE DRILLING. Mr. McINNES (Gippsland South):

I ask the Minister for Fuel and Power: In view of the reports emanating from Barrys Beach that EssoB.H.P. is claimed to be seriously curtailing construction of off -shore rigs for drilling, can the honorable gentleman confirm or deny this report and, further, can he advise what encouragement is being given either by the State Government or the Federal Government to drilling companies to undertake oil and gas exploration in view of the importance of the Gippsland basin?

Mr. BALFOUR (Minister for Fuel Power): I am not sure to which report the honorable member has referred. Very recently the Mackerel


structure was launched and is now being put in place in Bass Strait. The structure for the Tuna jacket has been started, and it is hoped there will not be any delay in the construction and erection of that off shore.

Exploration for oil and gas comes under the submerged lands legislation which is complementary legislation enacted by both the Federal Parliament and the State Parliaments. I am pleased to say that the Australian Minerals Council has been reactivated and in fact has now assumed the name of Australian Minerals and Energy Council. I believe the industry is waiting for a lead from the Commonwealth Government on what incentives may be made available for further exploration, both in Bass Strait and in the northern waters of Australia.

Operators who have petroleum exploration permits are carrying out the exploration work required under those permits issued in Victoria. Some areas were relinquished and they have been advertised, but I am afraid that because of the lack of incentives we have received no applications for those areas.

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition): In view of the statement just made by the Minister for Fue I and Power that certain advertisments concerning exploration leases have been published, can the Minister inform the House whether the Gas and Fuel Corporation has been anxious to obtain exploration permits in co-operation with an overseas oil company of international repute and to carry out exploration on terms not dissimilar to those which were available to Esso when it involved itself in exploration with B.H.P.? Can the Minister inform the House what attitude the Government has taken to this very important proposal by the Gas and Fuel Corporation? Can the House expect from the Minister an early statement indicating whether or not the Gas and Fuel Corporation will be permitted to enter the exploration field in conjuction with an overseas oil exploration company of its choice?

Mr. BALFOUR (Minister for Fuel and Power): There have been consultations between the Gas and Fuel Corporation and an oil company on the lil{elihood of a joint venture in exploration for gas, particularly in the Bass Strait area. At present the areas in which both those parties would be interested have not been advertised. They are not available. The Government has given some consideration to the project and I believe the right time to make a formal decision or statement on that or the possibilities of what might happen in the future is when the Government receives applications from the two parties involved.

GOROKE-HORSHAM BUS SERVICE.

Mr. McCABE (Lowan): Is the Treasurer in a position to advise whether the subsidy that the Government has been paying to Mr. Laurie Bretag at Goroke to enable him to continue his daily bus service between Goroke and Horsham will be paid again and if so, for how long the subsidy will continue?

Mr. HAMER (Premier and Treasurer) : The honorable member for Lowan is referring to a special subsidy which was given to a bus operator who was providing the sole means of public transport available to Goroke. That operator has been affected, as have many other people in the country areas, by the cancellation of Federal mail contracts and this made his operation entirely uneconomical.

The Government agreed t'O sustain him until the proposed Horsham freight centre was in operation, at which time it was expected that arrangements would be made which would provide for the transport of goods and passengers to and from Goroke from Horsham. The Horsham freight centre has commenced operations and quite properly the subsidy was withdrawn. However, representations have been made to me that the H'Orsham fI1eight centre is not fully in operation and does not yet


have a permanent arrangement concerning Goroke. In those circumstances I believe it would be appropriate to continue the subsidy until the end of this financial year or until an earlier time when the Horsham f'reight centre makes other adequate arrangements for the transport of goods and passengers to and from Goroke.

FALLS CREEK SKI CHARGES.

Mr. JASPER (Murray Valley): Does the Minister for Fuel and Power know of the enormous escalation in charges at Falls Creek, and that it has been suggested that there should be enorm10us increases in charges for the coming season for the ski tow operation by Alpine Developments (Ski Tows) Pty. Ltd. which is the sole operator of ski tows at Falls Creek?

Mr. BALFOUR (Minister for Fuel and Power): The 'Falls Creek area is under the control of a committee of management. It is the responsibility of the committee of management to approve all charges which are made in the area. To the best of my knowledge it is not within the jurisdiction of the State Electricity Commission or of the Minister to fix those charges, but I am aware that in all ski resorts charges for accommodation, ski hire and tows have over the past few years increased considerably.

NEPEAN SPECIAL SCHOOL.

Mr. FORDHAM (Footscray): Can the Minister of Special Education explain the reason for the yet further delay in the announcement of the rebuilding programme at the Nepean Special School for the physically handicapped, bearing in mind the atrocious conditions at that school and the promises made by the Government going back over many years for this work to be undertaken urgently.

Mr. SCANLAN (Minister of Special Education): The position at the Mount Eliza special school is

made more 'complex by various factors that have occurred since 1972. In particular I direct attention to a statement made in September, 1974, by the then Assistant Minister of Education, indicating that the whole of the special education building programme had been seriously affected by inflation, the escalation of building costs and by interruptions to the building industry. Therefore in 1974 the committee of Mount Eliza special school was advised that other arrangements would be considered by the Government. Following that, meetings were arranged which involved the Hospitals and Charities Commission, officers of the Education Department, the committee of YooraIla Hospital School for Crippled Children and the committee of Mount Eliza special school. At that time, in 1974, the committee of the Mount Eliza special school sought registration with the Hospitals and Charities Commission. We are hopeful that a satisfactory solution can be found to this problem, but those discussions are still being pursued and involve the Commonwealth Government.

PAPERS.

The following papers, pursuant to the directions of several Acts of Parliament, were laid on the table by the Clerk-Mental Health Authority-Report for the

year 1974.--Ordered to be printed. Statutory Rules under the following Acts

Industrial Training Act 1975, No. 103. Melbourne Harbor Trust Act 1958.

No. 104.

WEST GATE BRIDGE AUTHORITY.

Mr. JONES (Melbourne): I moveThat, in the opinion of this House. the

West Gate Bridge Authority should become a public corporation whose members are appOinted by the Minister of Transport and with a responsibility to report to the Parliament.

In 1957 a group of companies engaged in various industries around the area of Williamstown, Spotswood, Altona and Footscray formed the Western Industries Association. One

West Gate Bridge [6 MAY, 1976.] Authority. 645

of its objects was to secure a crossing over the Lower Yarra River. At that time the Bolte Government was extremely reluctant to provide additional money for needed public works. The then Minister of Public Works suggested that the Western Industries Association should form a private company limited by guarantee to try to raise the money through industry to build a crossing over the Lower Yarra River.

In 1961 the Lower Yarra Crossing Company Limited was established. In 1965 that company went into voluntary liquidation and was replaced by a new group called the Lower Yarra Crossing Authority Limited. The then Attorney-General, Sir Arthur Rylah, gave the company a licence to dispense with the word " Limited " in its name.

On 26th October, 1965, the Lower Yarra Crossing Authority Bill was introduced by the then Minister of Lands, Mr. Balfour. He explained during the Committee stage of the measure that the Minister actually in charge of the Bill was the then Minister for Local Government in another place, the Honorable R. J. Hamer.

The companies that formed the Western Industries Association included Ampol Petroleum Ltd., Altona Petrochemical Co. Pty. Ltd., Australian Carbon Black Pty. Ltd., Australian Synthetic Rubber Ltd., BP Australia Ltd., Caltex Oil (Aust.) Ltd., Colonial Gas Holdings Ltd., Colonial Sugar Refining Co. Ltd., Containers Ltd., Esso Standard Oil (Aust.) Ltd., General Motors-Holden's PtV. Ltd., Monsanto Chemicals (Australia) Ltd., Olympic Tyre and Rubber Co. Pty. Ltd., Petroleum Refineries Pty. Ltd., Shell Co. of Aust., H. C. Sleigh Ltd., Myer (Melbourne) Ltd., Union Carbide Aust. Ltd., and the Victorian Road Transport Association. In accordance with their financial capacity, a limitation of liability was set at $20 for each company.

The initial legislation, the Lower Yarra Crossing Authority Bill, set up the authority and enabled it to begin

planning operations for crossing the Yarra River. This was followed in 1966 by the Lower Yarra Crossing Authority (Guarantee) Bill. That measure gave the authority power to issue debentures which would be guaranteed by the Government of Victoria, and the Treasurer had the right to underwrite the amounts. It meant that the funds could be obtained through the Australian Loan Council at a special low rate of interest.

Back in the 1960s it was inevitable that if this project was to proceed, it would have to be backed by private enterprise. I do not deny that and do not take the credit away from the Western Industries Association. The point is that a decade later the stage has been reached when the authority ought to be incorporated as a Government authority or instrumentality.

There are ten major reasons why a company limited by guarantee should not be performing this role, and why it should be performed by a public corporation.

The first objection is that an organization formed as a private pressure group, the Western Industries Association, has been given statutory protection without being subject to full public accountability. For example, the West Gate Bridge Authority reports not to the Parliament, not to the Minister, but to the Commissioner of Corporate Affairs. The Government guarantees the issue of debenture stock, after the Treasurer has given his approval. However, the Treasurer is not obliged to report to the Parliament either before or after he gives this approval, and does not have to provide details of how much stock is issued and on what terms. In effect, Parliament agrees in advance to whatever the West Gate Bridge Authority and the Treasurer agree to.

The second objection is that the West Gate Bridge involves the development of a public resource by a private beneficiary. The public resource is the potential means of access from one part of the city to

646 West Gate Bridge [ASSEMBLY.] Authority.

another. It is too important, in our view, to be left in private hands. This matter has been debated since the 1840s or 1850s. As you pointed out, Mr. Speaker, in a particularly perceptive speech on the Bill in 1965, it has always been a matter of grave public concern that the western and south-western side of Melbourne should be so physically isolated from the bulk of the city.

I draw the attention of the Minister of Transport, who is at the table, and of the Premier to the general recommendations of the report of the Royal Commission chaired by Mr. Justice Rae Else-Mitchell on land tenures and development rights. There was a unanimous report by the Royal Commission, whose members included Mr. Justice Rae Else-Mitchell; Mr. G. J. Dusseldorp, of Lend Lease Corporation Ltd.; and Professor Russell Mathews, the Professor of Accounting and Public Finance at the Australian National University in Canberra. Professor Mathews is the present Prime Minister's guru on taxation, so he is unlikely to be a flaming radical.

Among the recommendations the commission made were these-

1. As a prerequisite to achieving comprehensive land use reform in Australia, all future development rights-that is rights to future changes in land useshould from a base date be acquired by and reserved to the Crown without payment of compensation.

5. All development rights should be vested in metropolitan and regional development corporations, which should have full and effective powers to control all urban development and redevelopment.

7.· Development corporations should also be given clear powers to define the conditions and timing of development and redevelopment for both public and privately owned land through the issue of development orders.

9. Development orders should reflect the principle of public ownership of development rights.

In many cases there has been a significant shift in public opinion on the question of development rights. In

Mr. Jones.

1971 there was consensus on the Newport power station, but now there is disagreement. In the future there may well be consensus in a different direction. The time is right for the Act of 1965 to be brought into line with present thinking.

The name of the Lower Yarra Crossing Authority was changed to the West Gate Bridge Authority by a Bill introduced in this House on 20th November, 1974, and enacted by the end of the year.

My third point is that the existence of the West Gate Bridge Authority raises the possibility of a conflict of interest between public policy and private policy. There are three levels -personal policy, private policy, and, the other extreme, public policy. Public policy must take some account of pressure groups but it cannot permit private interests to make the running. They may initiate and suggest things, and may take some part, but it is undesirable that the Government should vacate the field to free enterprise, and deny itself the right of participation.

For example, public policy is likely to require a reduction in the extent of our present dependence on the motor car and put much heavier emphasis on public transport. The statements of the Minister and the Premier have been in line with this in recent months, but because of its need to impose tolls to payoff the debenture holders, the West Gate Bridge Authority is obliged to encourage the use of private cars in a way which may be contrary to public interest.

In its 1975 directors' report the West Gate Bridge Authority, with crushing verbal insensitivity, referred to the "final solution" of the West Gate Bridge Authority's problems of . providing feeder routes-particularly !

on the eastern approaches to the· bridge-" to attract the maximum quantum of traffic". I

The interest of the West Gate' Bridge Authority demands the maximum amount of traffic, but it may:


well be, if public policy so determines, that the development of Melbourne's transport network will be in a different direction or there will be a different emphasis. Then the two interests may be quite contradictory. The West Gate Bridge Authority clearly sees the bridge as a traffic generator rather than as a traffic disperser. The view we are increasingly taking now is that roads and other means of public access ought to be used as a means of dispersing traffic. Obviously the West Gate Bridge Authority is looking towards traffic generation because it is clear, as the chairman says, that unless something like 50,000 to 60,000 vehicles pass over the bridge and pay the tolls, it will be impossible for the sums borrowed to be paid off within the 40 years originally intended.

The authority does not represent or reflect public interest. It represents road builders, and gas, oil and plastic companies. It aims at influencing public policy on freeway construction, but without the possibility of public scrutiny through the Parliament. As I said, it has no obligation to present its reports to Parliament where they can be debated.

The fourth point is that costs have been able to escalate without being subject to Parliamentary scrutiny. The original estimate in 1965 was $22 million for the bridge and $8 million for the approach roads. This increased to $49 million by 1970, to $59 million by 1971, to $75 million by 1972 and to $112 million by 1975. It is now suggested by the financial journals that the final cost will be something of the order of $200 million. This has been done without a Minister ever having to come to Parliament and say, "Here are the revised costs. Debate the issues, ask the questions and then let us vote to see whether there is continued public support for this project". This results in an increasing Jiability of the State being determined by a communication between a private company and the Treasurer of the day. There is no obligation to come before the Parlia-

ment. I should have thought there was a grave risk that it offended the spirit of the Commonwealth-State loans agreement of 1927. That is something which later speakers may be able to take up. Interest on the debentures is now running at the rate of $1 million a month.

The fifth point is that the West Gate Bridge Authority arrangements enable the principle of Ministerial responsibility to be evaded. There are two complementary heads of argument here: Either the West Gate Bridge Authority is acting independently of the Government, evolving major policies of its own in conjunction with the Country Roads Board-another administrative rogue elephant-and acting just like a private trading corporation, or-the other head of the argument-it is operating as part of the Government's over-all planning of transport operation, but in a way that takes it away from Ministerial responsibility and away from the direct scrutiny of Parliament. In either case, the same result should apply. If the West Gate Bridge Authority is operating independently of Government policy, it should be brought under Ministerial responsibility. If, however, the West Gate Bridge Authority is simply a part of the Government's operations, the Minister ought to be able to answer for it in Parliament.

It is conceded that the Gas and Fuel Corporation is a hybrid. It is part Government and part private. The Government holds a majority of the shares; it nominates four of the seven directors. The chairman is a public servant, and the Minister for Fuel and Power in this place has responsibility for it. I should think the Gas and Fuel Corporation might be a good interim model if, as I hope, the West Gate Bridge Authority goes public. There would be then a majority of Government directorssome of them may be existing directors-and there would be a continuation of private shareholders in the interim period before it became fully public.


After the West Gate Bridge tragedy of 15th October, 1970, in which 35 men died, so unnecessarily, as the Royal Commission pointed out, there was no Minister in this Parliament who had to put his reputa tion on the line and say, "Judge the evidence. If I have not been zealous enough as a Minister in my supervision of this project, vote me out". Instead, the Ministry's Pontius Pilates of 1971, after the commission had reported adversely on some aspects of administration, washed their collective hands, mouthing the words, " All care, but no responsibility". If a similar incident occurred in Japan, I suggest that the consequences would have been far more drastic for the Minister for Local Government there.

The sixth point is that a private interest, however legitimate in itself, cannot be equated with the public interest. In other words, the point of view of the people in Australian Carbon Black Pty. Ltd., and B.P. Australia Ltd., after pursuing legitimate business--

Mr. RAFFERTY: Why pick Australian Carbon Black Pty. Ltd?

Mr. JONES: Because the chairman of the authority has been associated with Australian Carbon Black Pty. Ltd. It cannot be equated with the public interest. It is not necessarily opposed, but it is not identical. Business interests, anxious for closer, faster transport links with Melbourne, have every right to put their claims, but even those claims may run parallel with the public interest but are not identical with it.

My seventh point is that the names Lower Yarra Crossing Authority, and West Gate Bridge Authority, are examples of deceptive packaging. In 1965 Sir Arthur Rylah, the Attorney-General, enabled the company to omit the word "Limited" from its name. There are very few people in the community who realize that the West Gate Bridge Authority is a public company, and not a public

corporation like the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, the Country Roads Board and the State Electricity Commission. In the report of the Royal Commission of 1971, the commissioners commented on the name of the Lower Yarra Crossing Authority and said on page 11-

Although that name .may give the impression that the body is a Government instrumentality of some sort, it is in fact a company limited by guarantee, and entirely comprised of representatives of private enterprise.

I suggest that the Royal Commissioners were correct. The overwhelming majority of people are not aware that this is a public corporation, that it is not accountable to the Parliament and that a Minister is not responsible for it.

My eighth objection is that there has been a disturbing failure to disclose relevant information. The present Premi1er, when Minister for Local Government, was the driving force behind the 1965 legislation. The Opposition believes that he was imprudent-I put it no higher than that-to retain his directorship of Moulded Products (Australasia) Ltd., renamed Nylex Corporation Ltd. on 1st January, 1967, which, as a factory owner in Deer Park, stood to gain from the bridge, and his directorship of the Gas Supply Co Ltd. That company was bought by Boral Ltd. in 1966, and subsequently was purchased from Boral Ltd. by the Gas and Fuel Corporation in 1971.

Mr. RAFFERTY: The Premier was imprudent?

Mr. JONES: Yes, when Minister for Local Government. He was even more imprudent not to declare his interest, direct or indirect, when he introduced the Lower Yarra Crossing Authority (Guarantee) Bill in the Legislative Council on 12th October, 1966. This is particularly surprising, especially as the Premier told the Legislative Assembly on 15th November, 1973-this will be found in Hansard at page 2043-that he had given up his Nylex directorship in


April, 1970, when he temporarily assumed the post of Minist'er of Public Works; this was between 9th April and 11 th June, 1970, and he wished to avoid a possible clash of interests between his directorship and the Ministry of Public Works. I find this puzzling. Why did not the same consideration apply in the Ministry of Local Government? Why was there a double standard? Was it because Nylex Corporation Ltd. might be trading in goods with the Public Works Department, and therefore he would be in breach of The Constitution Act, but he was only exercising influence, direct or indirect, on the Local Government Department? Surely the question of influence is much more significant than the question of goods because it is harder to detect?

My ninth point is that the links between the oil, gas and plastics in~ dustries and the W'est Gate Bridge Authority are too close for comfort and are hard to reconcile with national transport priorities.

In 1975 the directors of the West Gate Bridge Authority included Mr. Oscar Meyer, the chairman, who was the original chairman of Western Industries Association, a former chairman of Australian Carbon Black, director of Nylex, and chair~ man of E. A. Watts Pty. Ltd., the builders, well known for their public~ spirited actions over Deloraine Ter~ race. The deputy chairman was Mr. B. J. Callinan, a director of B.P. Australia Ltd., and also a director of the State Electricity Com~ mission. Other directors were Mr. 1. J. O'Donnell, a former chairman of the Country Roa?s Board, Mr. E. Angus Jones-a frIend but not a rela~ tive-a former chairman and general manager of Mobil (Australia) Ltd.; the late Robert Weir, who died during the course of 1975, and

. who was formerly on the board of Colonial Gas Holdings and a director of B.P. Australia Ltd., Mr. J. R. Duggan, a director of Babcock and Wilcox, and formerly of Colonial Gas Holdings Ltd.; and Mr. R. W. Ellis, of

Extruded Metals Pty. Ltd. and Delta Metal Holdings Ltd. One might ask who represented the pub~ lic interest? Public relations for the West Gate Bridge Authority are handled by International Public Relations Pty. Ltd., a firm with close personal links with the Liberal Party, and whose past tasks include doing a humanizing job on the Prime Minister in 1975, and acting as representative of many multi~national corporations.

Mr. HOLDING: And the pipeline under the bay.

Mr. JONES: That is correct. The board of Moulded Products Ltd., re~ named Nylex Corporation Ltd. on 1st January, 1967, in the years 1965-70 included Mr. Oscar M'eyer, Mr. F. L. Fitzpatrick and Mr. R. J. Hamer. It is true that Moulded Products Ltd. was not an original member of the Western Industries Association. Messrs. Hamer and Fitz~ patrick were also directors of the Gas Supply Co. Ltd. It will be known that Mr. R. J. Southey, for five years Federal President of the Liberal Party, is a director of B.P. Australia Ltd.

My tenth point is that there may be undisclosed objects of the West Gate Bridge Authority which are protected by the Act but not open to scrutiny. It is clear that the economic viability of the bridge is based on its use by an estimated 50,000 to 60,000 cars a day. In the annual reports for 1974 and 1975 it will be found that very real anxiety was expressed by Mr. Meyer about Government cut-backs in the freeway plan. He also expressed con~ siderable anxiety about the proposed Johnston Street bridge. The West Gate Bridge Authority and its supporting company are clearly devotees of the maximum use of private vehicles. The authority is able to exert strong influence in favour of linking the Mulgrave and South Eastern freeways, which could then be linked via F9 and F14 to the West Gate Bridge.


The two major development areas for the petro-chemical industry are the Altona area and the developing areas at Westernport. Pushing on with freeways, over public protests, would do a great deal to increase the sale of cars, fuel and accessories. It is more than a coincidence to read the names of the members of the Industrial Development Advisory Council of the Western Port Regional Planning Authority as reported at page 5087 of Hansard of 27th April, 1971, and find that those names included Mr. B. J. Callinan, deputy chairman of the West Gate Bridge Authority and a director of B.P. (Australia) Ltd., Mr. T. K. Duncan, of Broken Hill Proprietary Co. Ltd.; Mr. J. Ross, of Commonwealth Industrial Gases Ltd.; Mr. H. Bourne, of Nylex Corporation Ltd.; and Mr. W. Millar of B.P. Australia Ltd. A place was being kept open for a representative of Esso Standard Oil (Australia) Ltd.

The very possibility of conflict of interest must be avoided at all costs. I call on the House to support my motion.

Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport): I have listened with a great deal of interest to the honorable member for Melbourne. My first reference relates to the original debate on this matter in 1965, the report of which will be found in Hansard of November, 1965. I shall refer to two short references at page 1955 of Hansard of 25th November. The former member for Williamstown, who was an able debator in this House, said this on behalf of the Labor Party-

As a result, the method now proposed to be adopted is the only way of having the work carried out--

Mr. JONES: I have conceded that.

Mr. RAFFERTY: I appreciate that the honorable member has conceded that point, but it makes no difference to what I have to say. The honorable member for Williamstown continued-

The Opposition members do not object to the principle of the establishment of an authority to do it.

In another place the Honorable Archibald Todd was reported at page 2595 of Hansard of 9th December, 1965, as saying-

Finally, our party decided to accept, with reservations, the proposals contained in the Bill, and to offer no opposition to its passage.

Those statements are worth repeating because they show the original canvass on which this matter was debated.

That is the first point I have to make. The next point is simply that although the honorable member for Melbourne has clearly expressed his points of view, and I hope to deal with those, I believe that if the project had not been supported by all sides of the House when it was first proposed, it would never have got off the ground. It was a project of free enterprise. The matter was clearly debated and supported by all sides of the House. I repeat that the project would never have got off the ground had it not been for the initiative of people in the free enterprise system.

I found great difficulty, on the case put by the honorable member for Melbourne, in understanding why this matter is now being raised. The honorable member listed ten specific points but left a great deal to the imagination; also there was a great· deal of innuendo in what he said. It seemed to me that he was speaking in exactly the same way a s this House has heard Opposition members speak on so many occasions. After a project has been started and become successful, the Opposition suddenly realizes that that success ought to be transferred from the initiators to the Government. This is part of the general Socialist philosophy of the Opposition which honorable members have heard so many times before, and the Government accepts that that is the view of the Labor Party. Exactly the same attitude was exnressed concerning the gas and oil finds in Bass Strait, but I do not need to go into that in any detail.


In the early part of his remarks, the honorable member faithfully mentioned something of the history of the project. The facts stated were reasonably accurate and I accept what was said. However, certain historical aspects were not developed by him, and I want to develop these and to answer some of the ten points he raised.

The honorable member for Melbourne indicated how the matter started, how the name of the authority was changed and how the Attorney-General gave special permission to enable the project to be commenced. Parliament as a whole, by Act of Parliament, agreed that loan funds raised by the West Gate Bridge Authority would be guaranteed by· the Government, including the repayment of principal and interest on debentures issued by the authority. At that time the name of the authority was changed.

As is normal with any company, the authority has a board of directors and a small executive. The authority is subject to controls laid down by the Victorian Government concerning the total loan funds which may be raised in anyone year, and for every individual loan the authority must obtain the approval of the Governor in Council and be subject to the control of the Treasury. I felt that the honorable member for Melbourne did not make sufficient of that point and therefore I have expanded on it.

Accordingly the finance for the West Gate Bridge project is provided by loans arranged private1y-the honorable member made that pointbetween the authority and its lenders which comprise, as I think all honorable members know, major savings banks, life offices and superannuation funds. I mention this in particular because again it is part of the free enterprise approach which enabled this project to get off the ground.

To date no public moneys have been allocated directly from Government finances for any part of the

project, although provision is made in the West Gate Bridge Authority Act for the State Government to make advances from its Works and Services Account. However, no such funds have been advanced and it is not expected that any such funds will be required during the currency of the project. I mention that particularly to indicate that the authority, thus far, has conducted its affairs very satisfactorily and has not had the need to call upon the Government.

Mr. FORDHAM: The project is six years late.

Mr. RAFFERTY: A great deal of difficulty has been experienced-the honorable member for Footscray seems to be getting a little excited about the matter-and I shall deal presently with the reasons why it is six years late. Also on the subject of expenditure, for every contract of a value in excess of $200,000 or a duration in excess of three years the authority must first obtain the approval of the Government.

Mr. JONES: But is this reported to the Parliament?

Mr. RAFFERTY: As the honorable member knows, because he said it himself, it does not have to be. However, I do not think it is quite relevant to the point I am making. I stress that there is some control because, in the main, all the contracts are very large and therefore have to be referred to the Government. In that way I suggest that satisfactory control exists over the operations of the authority. Furthermore, I do not think that the honorable member for Melbourne expressed this sufficiently clearly for the benefit of the House. The Country Roads Board, which is another Government instrumentality, is the official adviser to the West Gate Bridge Authority.

Another point concerning finance is that the authority, in accordance with the requirements of the Companies Act, publishes a financial statement. IVIoreover, directors report at the conclusion of each financial year


and these published statements are lodged with the Commissioner of Corporate Affairs, and are available, certainly on the payment of a small charge, to any person who wishes to study them. The honorable member for Melbourne conveniently slid over that point.

Mr. JONES: I made that point quite explicitly.

Mr. RAFFERTY: The honorable member did not make it explicitly enough for me. Moreover, the chairman of the authority, either independently or in association with the general manager, regularly confers with the Minister and already, in the short time I have been the Minister, I have had three conferences and numerous telephone discussions with the chairman. He has to report to the Minister on all matters affecting the project, particularly industrial relations matters and the honorable member for Melbourne would realize the significance of that. All these things have been done by the chairman in order that the Minister is kept fully informed of current developments on this major project. The reason for this procedure is that, although the Act allows the authority to go along with a degree of independence from the Government, it is a matter of common sense that the authority should always keep in touch with the Government so that the Government, through its Minister of Transport, is aware of what is transpiring.

Further, in relation to Ministerial control, for the purposes of the administration of the Lower Yarra Crossing Authority Act-now the West Gate Bridge Authority Act-the Government initially nominated the Minister for Local Government as the Minister directly responsible, but, as honorable members know, that responsibility was transferred to the Minister of Transport, and I have that responsibility at present.

The board meets regularly each month. In addition, like any competent and prudent authority, it has established a number of small com-

mittees to deal with particular matters. The sub-committees so established are the Technical Committee, Finance Committee, Industrial Relations Committee, Public Relations Committee, Co-ordination Committee and the Staff Committee. I provide that information to indicate the responsible attitude that the board has always adopted since it undertook this mammoth task which will benefit the people of Victoria.

I do not think it is necessary for me to go into great detail on the next point raised by the honorable member, but it is important to point out the very clear difference between public corporations and the West Gate Bridge Authority. The burden of the complaint made by the honorable member for Melbourne, I think, can be allayed to some degree by the fact that the authority differs from a public corporation in that a public corporation is created by Act of Parliament for a specific objective and may operate only in accordance with the provisions of the specific Act.

As the honorable member said, a public corporation would be directly responsible to the Minister; members of the board would be appOinted by the Governor in Council; there would be restrictions on the appointment of personnel, and the salaries paid; and it would have to present a report to Parliament through the Minister. That is a brief precis of the proposition put by the honorable member for Melbourne.

There are major differences, But despite the apparent differences, I shall relate the facts appertaining to the West Gate Bridge Authority to inform honorable members how closely allied its operations are to those of a public corporation. First, it was established by an Act of Parliament and the Parliament can, from time to time, amend the Act. That has happened and, as I said earlier, on every occasion that amendments have been proposed they have been approved by the whole of the Parliament.


The West Gate Bridge Authority raises loans privately but the amount of borrowing, as I illustrated earlier, is controlled by the Government. Every contract exceeding $200,000 has to be approved by the Minister.

Under the requirements of the Companies Act, the authority must publish a financial statement and a directors' report each year, and this document is lodged with the Commissioner of Corporate Affairs. The authority keeps the Ministry of Transport fully informed of its operations and the Treasury fully informed of its financial situation.

The Country Roads Board is responsible for checking and advising on the work of the authority. It is also responsible for checking on technical matters relating to the construction of the project.

The West Gate Bridge Authority has the power to determine tolls, but the amount of the toll-the honorable member did not say this-must be approved by the Governor in Council. The toll is to be determined having regard to the financial requirements of the authority.

I submit that the operations of the West Gate Bridge Authority are not so far removed from those of an ordinary private company - the honorable member for Melbourne did not make that point. However, by inference, he gave the impression that the people operating the authority had, in some indirect way, an opportunity of benefiting from it. I make it very clear that they can obtain no monetary benefit from the project. The authority has the power, with the approval of the Government, to fix tolls, and this power would be exercised by any public authority.

As soon as the operating authority has amortized the cost of the project, the facility will be handed over to the State free of encumbrances. I venture to suggest that when this bridge is finished, which I hope will be next year, it will be a structure which will be a credit to those who

Session 1976.-23

have been involved with its construction. It will benefit the people of Victoria, and eventually it will be handed over to the State.

In addition to what I have already stated there are further Government controls, and it is important that the House should know about these. In addition to those imposed by the Government, and the provisions within the Act which govern the operation of the West Gate Bridge Authority together with the Companies Act, the Government requires the authority to submit to the Country Roads Board details of all construction proposals, design detail and method of bridge erection and how the works are to be undertaken. The Country Roads Board acts on behalf of the Government as the technical adviser.

The honorable member for Melbourne recited to the House the names of the directors. I shall not repeat them but simply point out that each one, apart from his position on the West Gate Bridge Authority, occupies an important and responsible position in the community which he has earned.

Mr. JONES: That is not in dispute. Mr. RAFFERTY: I am delighted to

hear that. However, I was surprised to hear the honorable member say by implication or suggest by innuendo that these gentlemen had an axe to grind.

Mr. JONES: I said their companies.

Mr. RAFFERTY: Yes, and by inference that they had personal axes to grind. However, every member of the West Gate Bridge Authority is an honorable person who occupies an honorable position in the community because he has earned the respect of the community in his own field. The honorable member for Melbourne now says he agrees with that, and I am delighted to hear his comment.

I refer now to the toll. Under the provisions of the principal Act, the authority has power to demand tolls. However, it will not demand tolls without the prior consent of the

654 West Gate Bridge [ASSEMBL Y.] Authority.

Governor in Council, and the amount of the tolls can be revised. The authority has estimated that approximately 85 per cent of the vehicles using the bridge will be motor cars and the remainder will be commercial vehicles.

The honorable member for Melbourne raised the point-once again, I thought, by innuendo but this time it could have been a little strongerthat the West Gate Bridge Authority has a vested interest in encouraging motor cars to use the crossing because it wants to collect the tolls. I have found no evidence to suggest that the authority has even placed special emphasis on that aspect. Obviously there are aspects of the project, which is a mammoth and costly one, which will need to be taken into account when usage of the bridge is being considered after its completion. Usage will develop by the people in the community who really are demanding the facility. It will not come about simply because the bridge is promoted by the West Gate Bridge Authority so that it can obtain bigger tolls. It will be because people in the community will demand the opportunity of using the facility. I believe every honorable member recognized that fact when the legislation was passed by this House.

One matter which the honorable member raised was the mammoth cost of the project. I want to refer now to the reason why those costs have escalated. Based on a December, 1970, completion date, the original estimate was $42 million. It should also be remembered that that estimate was made prior to the completion of the full design of the bridge and prior to the very unfortunate collapse in October, 1970, at which time the estimated date of completion was late 1971 at a cost of $50 million.

The latest information I have is that the completion date will be late 1977-1 sincerely hope it will be the completion date-and the estimated cost is $135 million plus interest charges. Since the original estimate was made there have been delays

Mr. Rafferty.

which have added to the costs. Those delays have played a major part in adding to the costs, and I shall refer to some of them. Firstly, there was the suspension of work brought about by the unfortunate collapse of the bridge, which required an investigation by a Royal Commission; everybody accepted that that was inevitable after the dreadful calamity. Secondly, time was lost in obtaining the services of experienced international contractors to work in conjunction with the local contractors, and here everybody recognized that after the disaster it was imperative from the point of view of everybody in the community that every effort should be made to ensure that there was no repetition of what had occurred. Therefore, there was a lapse of time which we all accept.

A reassessment of the design was progressively delayed whilst recommendations were received from the Morrison committee, which was established by the British Government following the failure of the Milford Haven Bridge and the West Gate Bridge, to undertake research and to formulate revised design rules which were published in part at intervals. All that took time.

Delays in production arose as a result of difficulties associated with the undertaking of a complicated modification which is now well known as the steel boxes. Another point was the sensitive industrial atmosphere that developed as a result of the collapse of the bridge, and again that was understandable. A further factor, which was indeed regrettable, was the high degree of absenteeism by the work force. My last pointa very important one-is the industrial disputes, which to date have resulted in completion of the bridge being delayed by at least 55 weeks.

They are some of the matters which have caused delays. 1 deal now with the causes of the escalation in costs. A substantial additional cost resulted from the redesigning, which involved replacement of the original deck by a stronger deck. Then there was the


modification of existing boxes, involving a great deal more work than previously. Next was the fabrication and erection of substantial false work to support one and a half spans on "the east side, which had to be modified on the spot. Owing to the additional weights to be lifted, expensive equipment had to be designed and manufactured. Then, as a result of the size of the bridge and added costs, insurance premiums increased considerably. There was also a large increase in holding and overhead charges due to the delay of about six years in the completion of the bridge.

Mr. WILTON: What has this to do with the motion?

Mr. RAFFERTY: The honorable member for Melbourne raised the question of the mammoth costs and I want to tell the House the reason for many of them. I know the honorable member says, "without Parliamentary approval". There was the rate of interest which the authority was required to meet on the borrowing; the rate of inflation, which increased considerably from 1972 onwards; and, again regrettably, very low labour productivity.

Industrial disruptions which delayed the work by at least 55 weeks cost at least $15 million and there was a solid degree of feather-bedding policies towards some of the unions. It would be very simple for me to indicate the loss which was due to industrial matters, and many honorable members might expect me to do so. I do not think that is necessary, other than to indicate that plenty of evidence is available to show that the project has been fraught with great industrial strife. At present things are running a little more smoothly and I hope that situation will continue.

I shall give some indications of forecasts which have been made by the authorities regarding traffic usage. This subject was referred to by the honorable member for Melbourne when he said it was being encouraged by the authority because of its need

to get the tolls. My answer was that I believed the community of Victoria was demanding the service and would continue to do so. These figures are important. It is expected that in 1977 some 50,000 vehicles a day will use the bridge-that indicates a large demand by the community. For 1979 the figure is estimated to be 60,000; for 1980,67,000; for 1982, 78,000; and for 1985, 94,000. Those projected figures indicate that many people in Melbourne and other parts of Victoria will be using the bridge.

Mr. FORDHAM: At $2 a time?

Mr. RAFFERTY: I do not know the figures but whatever they may be, they will come under the scrutiny of the Governor in Council.

Mr. Ross-EDWARDS: The bridge must be paid for.

Mr. RAFFERTY: Of course. The whole project was agreed to readily and sensibly by the spokesman of the Labor Party at the time, one of the leading members to grace the benches of the Opposition. It is estimated that between 16 and 18 per cent of the traffic will be commercial vehicles, ranging from light to heavy, and that heavy vehicles will represent about 4 per cent of the traffic. Generally the whole of the metropolitan area and the State will benefit from the construction of the bridge. Some 35 per cent of the traffic will be destined for the inner-city areas and a further 20 per cent for the areas north and east of the city.

The honorable member for Melbourne referred in one of his points to the feeder routes, which are very important. The board has taken an extremely responsible attitude right through in considering the views of the community regarding feeder routes and other matters. This policy was adopted long before the erstwhile Labor Government in Canberra suddenly realized that the people of the community ought to have some say. The people had a massive say on 13th December last year.


Those who take part in the discussions from time to time are myself as the Minister, the Honorable Alec Knight, M.L.C. as the member for the area, Mr. Doube, Mr. Stirling, Mr. Fogarty, the Honorable D. G. Elliot, M.L.C., and Mr. Fordham. Many of the municipalities also participate, including Altona, Footscray, Melbourne, South Melbourne, St. Kilda, Sunshine, Williamstown, Melton and Werribee. Representatives of all those areas of responsibility know what has been happening under the bridge authority and frequently they have met with members of the authority. Only last week I had the pleasure of being at one such meeting and talking with many of those gentlemen.

Other interested parties are the Geelong Regional Planning Authority, the Melbourne Harbor Trust, the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works and the Country Roads Board. That indicates that there is much liaison between the important groups in the community and the West Gate Bridge Authority, and it is necessary that those lines of communication continue. I assure the House that they will continue.

Mr. SIMPSON: What will the toll be?

Mr. RAFFERTY: That has not yet been decided, nor has a recommendation been made. It is too early yet to know the toll but it must be approved by the Governor in Council, and as soon as the figures become available all honorable members will know.

I have dealt with most of the matters raised by the honorable member for Melbourne. I indicated earlier that I believed the approach made by the honorable member was fairly consistent with Socialist objectives. The whole history of the bridge development from the time the original Bill was passed by this Parliament, plus what I have told the House this morning, indicate the way in which the West Gate Bridge Authority has undertaken its tasks

and has obeyed to the letter what was laid down by Parliament and what was agreed to by all political parties with the objective of ensuring that this project should proceed. I repeat that the project would not have got off the ground but for the enterprise, ingenuity and work that was put into it by the group that was approved by the Parliament.

The honorable member for Melbourne referred to the actions of the present Premier when he was Minister for Local Government. I do not propose to dwell on those matters, but only to state that that reference did the honorable member no credit. The history of the present Premier in his position in this House and in his previous position in the Legislative Council has been one of high commendation by the entire community. I deplore the innuendo of the honorable member for Melbourne.

Mr. JONES: No, to make a disclosure 'Of it.

Mr. RAFFERTY: The honorable member asked why the former Minister for Local Government did not see fit to relinquish his directorship of the Nylex Corporation Ltd.

Mr. JONES: No, to make a disclosure of it.

Mr. RAFFERTY: This matter has been debated in the House many times. The Premier has always acted honouflably in this House and in the other House when he was a member there, and the innuendo of the honorable member for Melbourne is not worthy of the Labor Party. This morning the honorable member for Melbourne was bent on exercising his voice. I do not believe he has made out a case on the motion that has been put to the House, which simply states-

That, in the opinion of this House, the West Gate Bridge Authority should become a public corporation whose members are appointed by the Minister of Transport and with a responsibility to report to the Parliament.


I have adequately indicated firstly, that approval of the project right throughout has been given by the whole of this Parliament; secondly, that every action by the authority from the start to the present time has been commendable to the community and I am sure will be in the future; thirdly, the project is a worth-while one which has been brought about by the initiative and enterprise of free enterprise, and it would not have been possible if it were not for that initiative; and fourthly, no evidence is available to support the proposition put by the honorable member for Melbourne. The legislation, which was approved by all sides of the House, contains ample safeguards of the interests of the community and is capable of amendment, if necessary. So f)ar it has not been considered necessary to alter the legislation further. Fifthly, the project will be of tremendous benefit to the community as a whole, and sixthly, after the amortization has been concluded, the authority will be handed over to the State of Victoria.

The entire project is in a healthy situation. Victoria should be pleased that people in its community have had sufficient interest to develop a project of this nature. The sche'me is worth while, and I commend those who have carried out their tasks to the letter in line with the decision of the Parliament and agreed to by everybody.

Mr. STIRLING (Williamstown): I support the motion moved by the honorable member for Melbourne. One must go back in time and be critical of former Governments, because, as the honorable member for Melbourne pointed out earlier, discussion on means of traversing the lower reaches of the Yarra River were first begun more than 130 years ago, back in the 1840s.

The crossing of the Yarra River by commercial means did not eventuate until 1907, when the famous WiIliamstown ferry came into operation. In 1912 propositions were put to the Government of the day for

some type of crossing to be constructed, iand the possibility of a tunnel being built was investigated. This proposal was finally rejected, and the next move to build a crossing for the benefit of the small amount of industry that existed in the western suburbs at that time occurred in about 1936. As I said, one must be critical of previous Governments, particularly in the past 30 years, because 20 years ago the new oil refining process and associated industries were introduced into the Altona area. Later massive petrochemical complexes were built to the west of Altona.

The honorable member for Melbourne told the House the composition of the Western Industries Association, which put to the Government in the late 1950s the proposition that the metal fabrication industry be introduced. The biggest section of that industry is located in the western suburbs. Consequently, these people must have had a vested interest, because construction of pressure vessels, tankers and petrochemical equipment was taking place on the eastern side of Melbourne down as far as Westernport Bay, and these materials were needed.

The Minister of Transport referred to my predecessor, Mr. Larry Floyd, who supported the project when the proposed legislation was introduced into Parliament. This was understandable, and the Minister said that the community of Williamstown and other western areas had been requesting a crossing near the mouth of the Yarra River, and that if this was the only means of achieving it, it would be better than nothing.

The honorable member for Melbourne spoke about the conflict of interests, and in reply the Minister of Transport said that the people concerned in the Western Industries Association had no vested interest in the Lower Yarra Crossing Authority. It has been estimated that on a week day 50,000 cars will use the crossing and it is

658 West Gate Bridge [ASSEMBLY.] Authority_

hoped that more will use it on week-ends. The companies mentioned by the honorable member for Melbourne will benefit from the scheme, because the petroleum and associa ted industries of Melbourne and major oil companies are concentrated in the Spotswood area.

I do not know whether honorable members 'ever used the old Williamstown ferry, but previously people queued up for miles to board it. The majority of transport using the ferry consisted of petrol tankers taking a short cut to the eastern suburbs, so it was an ill-considered statement for the Minister to s'ay that these people had no vested interest.

In his speech the honorable member for Melbourne pointed out that the companies he was referring to were represented on the authority and would receive the benefit from the crossing. The Minister of Transport indicated that no public money had been spent on this project. I point out to the Minister that it is my understanding that $100,000 was spent in 1962 when the Public Works Department carried out a surface strata investigation.

Mr. Ross-EDWARDS: That is only natural, is it not?

Mr. STIRLING: Yes, but the Minister made the point that no public money was spent.

Mr. Ross-EDWARDS: Before it was set up.

Mr. STIRLING: The Minister made reference to disputes that have played a large part in delaying the construction of the bridge. It is my view, and the view of the Opposition, that in a project which provides a crossing for the benefit of the public, and where there is a private enterprise scheme with some indirect profit motive as against a public avenue construction project, there must be conflict between the workforce and people with a vested interest and private motive. If the

bridge had been built by a public body, then perhaps delays would not have occurred.

Mr. ROSS-EDWARDS(Leader of the National Party): The National Party will not support the motion before the House for very simple reasons which I shall go through briefly. It is a question of principle, and not so much a case of the merits of what should have happened when the enabling legislation was passed. All three parties had an opportunity then, if they had wanted to, to move amendments to the legislation. What happened was-and this has been explained to the House--all three parties, and all three spokesmen agreed to the legislation, and agreed to it unanimously. That is a fairly basic point. Since then, in my view, nothing has happened which has given any good reason for this change. If there had been incompetence or dishonesty, and greater Government control would assist, then consideration would be given to supporting the motion.

There are many examples in Parliament, both in this Parliament and in other Parliaments, where a Government has entered into an agreement with business interests. If the Government changes, the new Government goes along with the arrangements that have been made because a legal contract has been entered into and there is also a moral contract; although the new Government has the power and the numbers to change it, it does not do so. If the Government is to retain the confidence of the business people of Victoria, it must not change an agreement that it has entered into without good and sufficient reason.

It was also mentioned by the Minister of Transport that a typical example of this is the Bass Strait oil situation. If no oil had been found we would not have heard any more of it. As soon as oil is


found and there eventuates a successful result, changes are desired by the Opposition.

The National Party will not support the motion. No good reasons have been given why it should do so. Mention has been made of the toll, and regretfully the whole project has cost very much more than it was expected to cost, but this is for reasons of which all honorable members are aware. Although people will not be happy with the toll that will be imposed, the bridge has to be paid for. It has been built with borrowed money which has to be repaid, and responsibility cannot be handed back to the Government. One cannot stop half way, and if a realistic toll is not imposed the cost of the bridge will be a burden on the taxpayers of Victoria. The fact that there will be a high toll must be accepted, particularly by those who will be using it consistently.

Mr. STIRLING: If the toll is too high I will not be using it.

Mr. ROSS-EDWARDS: This is still a free country and if the honorable member does not want to use the bridge he need not use it. If an economic toll is not paid, every man, woman and child in this State will have to subsidize the cost of the bridge and I do not think that would have the support of the people of Victoria. The toll has to be a realistic one, and in the long term the West Gate Bridge will be a tremendous asset to the State.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): Order! The honorable member for Heatherton.

Mr. FORDHAM (Footscray): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I believe the call is on this side. There has just been a speaker against the motion.. It is quite clear that the Government is opposing the motion. We have just heard the Leader

of the National Party making it quite clear that his party is opposing the motion. Therefore the call should come back to the Opposition side, where honorable members support the motion.

Mr. REESE (Heatherton): I am quite happy to defer.

Mr. FORDHAM (Footscray): I am delighted to be able to join briefly in this debate. I congratulate the honorable member for Melbourne on his excellent contribution on this very important public issue. Despite what the Minister of Transport says, the Opposition is not questioning the capacity of the members of the West Gate Bridge AuthOrity, although one would have thought by looking at the tragic collapse of the bridge, the enormous escalation of costs, and the worst record of industrial relations of which I am aware, that this matter could be discussed at another time. The Opposition is talking about the accountability of the West Gate Bridge Authority to this Parliament and the people of Victoria, and the conflict of interest between the interests of the West Gate Bridge Authority and the overall public interest. The Minister of Transport chose to distort the views of the predecessor of the present honorable member for Williamstown. I should like to quote what Mr. Floyd said in 1965, in its proper context-

We believe all public facilities such as bridges and roads should be built by the Government, and Parliament should have control from beginning to end over design, construction and everything else associated with them.

And he explained that this Government refused to make the funds available. He went on-

People are not satisfied sufficient control will be maintained by the Government and we believe the composition of the authority is too narrow.

660 West Gate Bridge [ ASSEMBLY.] Authority.

That was the view of the honorable member for Williamstown at that time, which the Minister forgot to mention.

The other thing I believe is deplorable is that the Premi:r did not stay in the House for thIs debate. It is quite clear from the comments of the honorable member for Melbourne why he chose not to face up to this crucial debate: It is his own involvement with those who opposed this authority in 1965 and his refusal to face up to his own conflict of interest as Minister for Local Government, and also as a member of the board of one of the companies involved in this proposal. That has still to be answered and the Opposition looks forward to the Government at another time facing up to that issue.

However, let me get on to this question of accountability. Is it proper for a private group with private interests to be involved in the construction of a public utility? That is what a bridge is. What we were told in 1965 was that there was an identical interest between those private interests and the public interest at that time. The Parliament, I must admit, accepted that in 1965, but surely it is legitimate for us to ask now whether there still is, if there ever was, that coincidence of private and public interest. I believe, and this has been demonstrated by the honorable member for Melbourne, that because of planning changes in the Melbourne and metropolitan area, and particularly because of changing patterns of transport-obviously this will be a matter of ongoing concern for this Parliament-there is no longer that identical interest between private and public interest on the operation of the West Gate Bridge Authority.

What might have been clear to many people in 1965 is not so clear now. The private interest of the

Mr. Fordham.

West Gate Bridge Authority, contrary to what the Minister of Transport has said, is to simply generate the maximum amount of traffic possible and to put up feeder routes to meet the needs of the bridge. The Minister of Lands who introduced the enabling Bill in the Legislative Assembly in 1965 made no bones about the fact that the bridge was to be part of a freeway link between Geelong, the western suburbs of Melbourne and Dandenong, the Latrobe Valley and Westernport. It may have been in the public interest at the time, but surely there has been a significant change of attitude on the part of members of Parliament and the public at large about this sort of freeway link. Clearly the inner communities of Melbourne do not want it.

However, it is still the policy of the authority, as seen in its last annual report. It has expressed concern at suggestions that the Government has changed its mind about the provision of roads li!lking .the West Gate Bridge. That IS an Imp0Ii:ant matter of principle about the dlc~tomy of interest in 1965. There IS now a division, according to the authority, bet~een the Gove~ment and the authOrIty. In those CIrcumstances we can no longer continue to condone a private authority being involved in a public interest.

It is important that Parliament supports the motion moved by the honorable member for Melbourne. I regret that time does not allow m.e to proceed. Members of the O'pP~Sltion would like a vote on this Important matter so that the public of Victoria will know once and for all where Parliament stands. We have shown that circumstances have changed since 1965. The public interest demands the establishment of a public authority to look after the present and future of the West Gate Bridge. I hope members of Parlia-. ment will support the motion.

Supply (1976-77, [6 MAY, 1976.] No. 1) Bill. 661

The House divided on the motion (Sir Kenneth Wheeler in the chair)-

Ayes 22 No~ 49

Majority against the motion.. 27

Mr. Amos Mr. Cain Mr. Cathie Mr. Crabb Mr. Culpin Mr. Doube Mr. Edmunds Mr. Fogarty Mr. Fordham Mr. Ginifer Mr. Holding Mr. Jones

AYES.

Mr. Lind Mr. Mutton Mr. Roper Mr. Simmonds Mr. Simpson Mr. Trezise Mr. Wilkes Mr. Wilton

Tellers: Mr. Kirkwood Mr. Stirling

NOES.

Mr. Austin Mr. McClure Mr. Balfour Mr. Mclnnes Mr. Billing Mr. McKellar Mr. Birrell Mr. Mackinnon Mr. Borthwick Mr. McLaren Mr. Burgin Mrs. Patrick Mr. Coleman Mr. Rafferty Mr. Collins Mr. Ramsay Mr. Cox Mr. Reese Mr. Dixon Mr. Richardson Mr. Ebery Mr. Ross-Edwards Mr. Evans Mr. Scanlan

(Gippsland East) Mr. Skeggs Mr. Francis Mr. Smith Mr. Gude (South Barwon) Mr. Hamer Mr. Stephen Mr. Hudson Mr. Thompson Mr. Jasper Mr. Trewin Mr. Jennings Mr. Vale Mr. Jona Mr. Weideman Mr. Kennett Mr. Whiting Mr. Lacy Mr. Williams Mr. Lieberman Mr. Wood Mr. Loxton Tellers: Mr. McArthur Mr. Guy Mr. McCabe Mr. Hann

The sitting was suspended at 1.6 p.m. until 2.3 p.m.

SUPPLY (1976-77, No. 1) BILL.

The House went into Committee for the further consideration of this Bill.

Discussion was resumed of clause 2, relating to appropriations.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. McLaren): I point out to honorablemembers that, in discussing the Bill in Committee and the particular division numbers in the table, it is the practice and requirement of this Committee

that discussion will take place on an individual item alone and not on other matters.

Mr. EDMUNDS (Ascot Vale): On a point of explanation, can you, Mr. Chairman, inform the Committee whether it is intended to call the division numbers one after another, or will the Committee discuss subjects which come under those particular items?

The CHAIRMAN: As the honorable member has indicated, the Committee is debating clause 2 and it is usual to discuss the individual items.

Mr. CATHIE (Carrum): I relate my remarks to the Nepean Special School for physically handicapped children at Mount Eliza, and the failure of the Government to establish a new school and treatment-training unit. This matter has concerned the local people for some considerable time. Promises have been made and broken and a desperate situation has been reached in that the school is housed in an old building and conditions are appalling. The building is dilapidated and completely inadequate and shows the years of neglect and broken promises.

The Frankston Standard of 21st April ran a front-page story under the headline, cc School Fire Fears". The story quotes from a report by the Country Fire Authority, which pointed out that the school was extremely overcrowded and expressed the view of teachers at the school that the existing building, with the children having to be moved around in wheel chairs, is not only inadequate but also constitutes a serious risk to the lives of teachers and children. The newspaper also carried a middle-page spread of photographs indicating the narrow corridors of the existing building and how difficult it would be to manoeuvre a wheel chair at any time, let alone at a time of an emergency such as fire.

Teachers, parents and paramedical staff at the school were so concerned and desperate that on 11 th April a

662 Supply (1976-77, [ASSEMBLY.] No. 1) Bill.

meeting was held which 90 people attended. The discussion made it clear that the people were upset at the inadequate and grossly overcrowded building and the lack of action by the Government, which, since 1972, had promised to build a new school. The meeting resolved that a further meeting of parents would be called within fourteen days when they would decide whether action would be taken to withdraw children from the school. The situation is so desperate that the parents, teachers and paramedical staff have threatened to withdraw children from the school.

It might be suggested that confusion exists in the minds of the Ministers who have dealt with this matter in the past, but I do not believe that to be so. To support my view, I refer to a summary of past events which was prepared by Mr. Briffa. on behalf of the school and on behalf of the parents.

In 1972, when the school reached an enrolment of 104, parents becalne concerned at overcrowding at the school and feared that the whole building was becoming a fire trap. In March 1973 the then Minister of Transport, Mr. Ray Meagher, attended a public meeting in the school ground where he made a number of specific promises. On behalf of the State Liberal Government he promised to build not only a new school at Frankston but a school which, because of the children it has to cope with, would include a treatment and training unit.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. McLaren): Order! I wish to make a further explanation. I am sorry to interrupt the speech of the honorable member, but I have allowed the honorable member to proceed up to this stage. It must be clear that on the Supply Bill, the Committee is discussing matters of maintenance, current expenditure, salaries and other services. Matters relating to the construction of new buildings or capital expendifure of any kind can be fully discussed under the works and services Bill which will be introduced in due

course. I have given the honorable member a great deal of latitude so far, realizing that circumstances are changing, but I suggest that he should confine his remarks to ma tters relating to maintenance, fire prevention and so forth. The subject of new buildings can be fully discussed under another measure.

Mr. CATHIE: I am referring to Division 310, which relates to education administration, salaries, general expenses and other services. I have been developing an argument on the reasons for the run-down condition of this school. I pointed out that the school is run-down and completely inadequate to provide the services for those children because the new school has not been built. Year after year people have been reluctant to spend money on the school because they believed money would be made available to them by the Government for a new school and training unit. That was the point I was about to establish. I take it I shall be in order if I proceed to do so.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! I am prepared to hear the honorable member on matters relating to the present condition of the school and the need for a new building, but to discuss the spending of money on a new building, as the honorabh~ member was about to do when I first interrupted, is a matter which comes under the works and services Bill. I have allowed the honorable member to proceed although I realized he might get into this area. I suggest that he should establish his case on the present condition of the school. To develop an argument on how far one should spend money on the erection of a new school would be out of order.

Mr. CATHIE: I come back to the point about the completely inadequate conditions that exist at present. I have pointed out that the situation is so desperate that the people concerned are prepared to withdraw the children from the school until something is done. It is obvious to m·e


that whatever is done new buildings must be provided. I will leave it at that point.

Mr. STEPHEN (Ballarat South): I want to touch briefly on the subject of education. I commend the Government for the action it has taken over recent years in establishing directors of regional education in regional directorates. I particularly commend the regional director and his staff at Ballarat for their efforts and also the improvements in the educational field which have taken place in general in the Ballarat district because of the work done by the director.

The recent opening of the Mount Clear technical-high school, in what are regarded as temporary buildings, went ahead smoothly and without any irritation from the parents whilst this major school is being put on the drawing board. It will ultimately come into being on an adjoining site.

The expansion of the regional directorates of education which have borne a great deal of fruit in the interests of education in general has been one of the most marked departures from departmental policy. I commend the Government for its efforts in this field and I hope that it will continue to expand and strengthen the regional directorates.

The work of the Mines Department is a Government activity which does not get a great deal of commendation; nor are its efforts highlighted greatly in these times. I wish to thank the Government and commend the Mines Department and its staff who have been instrumental in finding underground water in my electorate. Although the supply of underground water is abundant in many areas, in the Gordon-Mount Egerton area the viability of the water scheme was in doubt until the Mines Department agreed to put down a number of bores, which were eventually successful in prodUcing reasonable water in very large quantities. It appears at this stage that, if the other factors of viability can be satisfied, it is

possible that this area of GordonMount Egerton will obtain a sorelyneeded reticulated water supply.

With the current economic and seasonal conditions I suppose one could speak on all headings under agriculture with justification but I shall confine my remarks to extension services. When seasonal conditions are catastrophic extension services can be of the greatest importance to rural industry but in the existing economic situation extension services of any nature are of limited benefit. Even so, with the great stresses which the rural community is suffering at present, the extension services are of vital importance to advise and assist that community.

The Government is conscious of the rural problems and is constantly taking action to alleviate, where possible, the heavy load which has fallen on country people. Unfortunately the public at large seems to have no regard for the fact that the rural section of the community, which has a considerable asset backing, needs to obtain an income return. It is a reflection on the thinking of our community. In the near future much will be heard, and evidence will appear in our daily papers, of the plight of the rural community and how the metropolitan area and the urban communities will be affected because of the dire straits which the agricultural section of our State finds itself in at this moment.

For industrial development the Treasurer is asking for an appropriation of just under $12 million. In the past six years, especially the past three years, not enough emphasis has been placed on the success of the activity of the Government in this field. I pay a tribute to my Parliamentary colleague, the former Minister for State Development and Decentralization, for his enthusiasm and the work he carried out when he had the honour of representing the State in that portfolio.

It is too quickly forgotten that in the upsurge of a successful decentralization programme a number of


job opportunities became available in the country areas. Had it not been for them the situation in which the rural community now finds itself would be far worse. It would be in much more distress than it is because there would have been fewer job opportunities available had it not been for the success of Government policies in the field of State development and decentralization over the past three to six years.

Approval is sought for an appropriation of $120 million for railways. That is a sizeable amount of money for any State to be seeking to apply for the period up to 30th November. It is true that we no longer expect the railways to pay their way. They are looked upon as a social service by those who use them. Although much of the loss in the railways could be called an operating loss, we in the rural community derive a benefit from their operations. I suggest that the rural communities would be the first to attack the Government if the services and facilities were reduced to any major degree.

At the same time, it is felt that these funds could be better applied and a better return obtained. I know the Government has expanded its activities in this field by appointing the Railways Board. Although not much progress has been made in this area, honorable members are hopeful that in the not-too-distant future some major improvements will be forthcoming under the guidance of the Railways Board.

Mr. KIRKWOOD (Preston) : I wish to speak on local government. At the earliest possible moment the State Government should make known its views on how local government is to be financed. It was not made clear during the secondreading debate just when, how and by whom finance for this purpose would be provided. This is important to people living in my electorate. It is essential that the Preston City Council should be in possession of all relevant information prior to the

preparation of its estimates in August and September as it will have to know if matters categorized in the past few years as special needs are to be financed from State Government resources. The council will have to know the formula to ascertain whether it can keep pace. I do not know what it is going to be, and I doubt whether any person reading this Bill and hearing what has been said in this debate would be any closer to knowing the amount than anyone outside just hazarding a guess.

There is always the possibility, because we now have a brand new federalism policy, that some subsidies to municipalities could be discontinued to enable the continuing services of the Government to be financed. This would not be a fair method of sharing as I sincerely believe many services provided by local government have been financed more than they should have been by the local communities.

As an example, I cite the fields of health and welfare. The Preston City Council has gone to extraordinary lengths to increase its services in those areas. In the past year there was a 230 per cent increase in expenditure on health services, compared with an increase of only 39 per cent on road expenditure. The information I have available is in the publication Know Your City, issued by the Preston City Council, and covers the period from 1965-66 to 1975-76.

In the City of Preston the expenditure on health services has increased from $278,000 in 1965-66 to $928,000 in 1975-76.

Mr. B. J. EVANS: What was the expenditure on roads?

Mr. KIRKWOOD: The percentage expenditure on roads has declined. It is probably important for me to mention this also. Expenditure on roads in 1965-66 was $612,000, whereas in 1975-76 it was $852,000,


which means that the rate of increase in expenditure on roads is only 39 per cent whereas for health services it was 230 per cent.

The basic source of funds for expenditure by municipalities is the levying of rates, and if services are to be maintained the State Government or the Federal Government has to bear more of the financial burden.

The Municipal Association of Victoria has circulated a leaflet covering this aspect. The document is signed by Mr. Fagan, the secretary, and item 14 states-

The executive council is of the view that absorption of special purpose grants should not take place at this time. The matter of absorption is a complex issue involving a variety of types of assistance, the extent of which varies in each State. To consider absorption at this stage would further complicate decision-making. In view of the limited time available to plan and introduce a new reform, it is suggested that for 1976-77, a new scheme of assistance should replace only those general purpose grants previously made on the recommendation of the Grants Commission.

The time is obviously too short to do what the Government intends to do but local government is concerned and the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works thinks it, too, should be financed out of special grants. The Municipal Association is single-minded on this subject. It is determined that only municipal councils should be the recipient of those funds.

In local government today there are many aspects of revenue sharing. The Municipal Association, through this letter, emphasizes that in formulating a new frontier, as the Government is doing, the Government should be given plenty of time. Members of the commission should not present to the people of Victoria in a short time a fait accompli; the matter should be considered at length and after the discussions have taken place appropriate decisions should be made to assist municipal government in the best way possible.

One of the foremost speakers on behalf of local government has been the Deputy Leader of the Labor Party

who has criticized the State Government on the Metcon signs which have been introduced into Victoria. When the Premier visited England he was impressed with the system and put the Metcon system into operation in Victoria. The honorable gentleman is to be commended for that. However, as any municipality would confirm, the Premier forgot to provide adequate funding.

The attitude that the Road Safety and Traffic Authority now adopts, with the approval of the Premier, in relation to pedestrian crossings, other crossings, and traffic signals, is that the municipalities can install traffic lights funded by themselves and at a later date when the Road Safety and Traffic Authority has the finance from the State Government the cost will be refunded to the municipality.

Mr. WILK'ES: It will cost approximately $34 million.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: That is so. At present small areas in the municipalities are not being equipped with Metcon signs, and this is creating havoc to drivers. The main arterial roads all have the signs painted on them. In the city of Preston the cost of marking an approach to an intersection is $61.50. For one intersection that is not a lot of money but when the marking is done throughout the various intersections of a municipality, which would number hundreds, a council would have to be subsidized in some way. At present the councils have to subsidize the erection of the signs and the approaches have to be approved by the Road Safety and Traffic Authority.

The Government should give serious consideration to providing extra finance to the municipalities of Victoria. An inquiry would indicate that most people are in favour of having the Metcon signs installed at every intersection. However, that could only take place if the municipalities funded the installation and later were reimbursed by the Government, or if the municipalities were allowed to approve the intersections themselves.

666 Supply (1976-77, [ASSEMBL Y.] No. 1) Bill.

The present situation is not good enough. I hope the Premier will seriously consider introducing a new Metcon system. I know the honorable gentleman is interested and I hope he will apply to the new system the same system of funding that applies to the installation of traffic signals.

Mr. WILKES (Northcote): I draw the attention of the House to an item concerning the Chief Secretary. My attention, and no doubt that of the Premier, has been drawn to the fact that in Victoria public and teaching hospitals are compelled to take blood samples of accident victims and store the samples for periods of time, which causes not only inconvenience to the hospital staff but wastage of time in casualty and creates many problems that I am sure the Government and the Premier do not fully appreciate.

The Australian Association of Medical Superintendents of Victorian Hospitals drew to my attention the considerable disquiet that exists in Victorian hospitals over the implementation of the blood alcohol legislation which is embodied in the Motor Car Act 1958. I refer to section 80DA, which was inserted in the Act by an amending Bill, passed in 1973.

These people have had representations made to them bv the Association of Casualty Supervisors of Victorian Hospitals and by the resident medical officers of the subdivision of the Australian Medical Association which, when added to the often expressed views of members of that association, indicates a strong groundswell of opinion that changes should be made. For instance, the staff in the casualty departments in public and teaching hospitals are compelled by law to take blood samples from all road accident victims who are brought to their attention. This practice has resulted in considerably increased work loads at times when staff are overtaxed in hospitals. There is now widespread dissatisfaction and resentment because since December 1975 the medico-legal laboratory at the Coroners Court has been discarding all samples other than those from drivers. This

was confirmed in a letter dated 19th January, 1976, from the Chief Secretary to the Association of Casualty Supervisors of Victorian Hospitals. The secretary of the Coroner's Court advised the association that the court was using only samples taken from drivers and not from passengers of cars involved in accidents.

The situation has been compounded by the complexity of documentation and the rigidity of the requirement for the safekeeping of blood samples in hospitals. I invite the Premier, or the Chief Secretary in another place, to consider the problems in Victorian public and teaching hospitals where these samples must be stored. Despite the enormous medical effort involved, statistics indicate a disproportionately low prosecution rate.

The association emphasizes that it is not the principle of the legislation that is under criticism-the concept is laudible-but the present implementation in the hospital system has resulted in a good deal of unrest. The association believes there is a strong probability that the casualty staff, as a matter of principle, will withdraw their support and refuse to take blood samples in defiance of the law unless the Government does something about the matter.

They are concerned at this possible outcome and have written to members of Parliament acquainting them with the proposition and urging them to give it their support. I support their view that the current legislation should be suspended for six months to allow for further review of the aspects under consideration to be carried out. It is hoped that such a review would involve consultation with the various bodies who are responsible for making the legislation work. Obviously no consultation took place with the various hospital staffs, the medical superintendents and registrars of hospitals to ask their opinion on whether the legislation would work. It is extremely voluminous by nature.


Organizations that support the view include members of the Association of Medical Superintendents, the Secretary of the Road Trauma Committee, the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons-the former Chief Secretary, Mr. Rossiter, was written to-the Secretary of the Australian Medical Association; Dr. Hirst, the President of the Association of Casualty Supervisors of Victorian Hospitals; Dr. James Butler, a representative of the Royal Melbourne Hospital Subdivision of the Australian Medical Association; and the Secretary of the Hospitals and Charities Commission. However, nothing has happened.

I was pleased to learn that the President of the Preston and Northcote Community Hospital, with which I have been associated for about twenty years, wrote to the Premier on 5th May pointing out the situation there, where the casualty load is as great as that of any public or teaching hospital in the State. The staff are expected to work under poor conditions in the casualty section, which is totally inadequate for the case load which it is expected to handle, and for the high reputation it maintains. Mr. Gordon Trinca is an honorary surgeon at the hospital and handles many accident cases from the casualty department. They do not have time to mess about with the Government's legislation.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. MeLaren): Order! I indicated earlier that honorable members should state the items to which they are referring. I take it the honorable member for Northcote was referring to health when speaking about hospitals?

Mr. WILKES: That is ri.ght, Mr. Chairman. I am now directing your attention to an item under the heading of "Health", and before that I was addressing you on the appropriation of $57 million under the heading of Chief Secretary. The matters are directly related. Section BODA of the Motor Car Act

concerns the Minister of Health as well as the Chief Secretary, because hospitals are being seriously inconvenienced and their work impeded by the stupidity of that part of the legislation that is not acknowledged in coronial inquiries or by the coroner.

As I was about to point out to you, Mr. Chairman, before you reminded me of my duty, the board of management of the Preston and Northcote Community Hospital wrote to the Treasurer on 5th May telling him that it had received a letter from the Association of Medical Superintendents of Victorian Hospitals, of which a copy was enclosed, and it asked the honorable gentleman to examine it. No doubt the Treasurer will read the letter in good time, but I direct his attention to it so that he may form an opinion in the interests of the public and teaching hospitals in Victoria.

The letter pointed out to the Treasurer tha t in a report on experience at the Preston and Northcote Community Hospital, the executive director, Dr. I. A. G. Brand, had advised that in the period from 1st January to 31st March this year blood samples were taken from 326 patients in the casualty department of the hospital, as required by section BODA of the Act. Three specimens were taken from each person. One can imagine the work involved in that exercise. Many of these accident cases occur on Saturday night, which is the busiest time in the casualty sections of most hospitals. One sample is for the Coroners Court, one for the police and one for the patient~ to safeguard his rights. Dr. Brand said that as far as he could ascertain-and I would justify the preciseness of his assessment of the situation-only one prosecution was pending out of 326 persons from whom 978 specimens had been collected. Of the 978 specimens, 326 were collected by the Coroners Court and only 28 by the police.


Only one person has been prosecuted of those from whom samples were taken.

The board of management of the hospital has carefully considered the approach of the medical superintendents, and instead of supporting their proposal for suspension of the legislation it resolved to contact the Premier. The board did not want to act unilaterally as a hospital but wanted the Treasurer to be aware of its views. If the honorable gentleman contacted the coroner, the secretary of the Coroners Court or the medical superintendents at Austin Hospital or Royal Melbourne Hospital, he would receive the same advice. Those people believe that the legislation is useless and is causing concern and confusion to the people who carry out wonderful work in hospital casualty departments at all times. It ill behoves the Government not to act to relieve the pressure on hospitals as quickly as possible. When only one person out of 326 from whom blood samples were taken is prosecuted under the legislation, it surely highlights, if nothing else, the need for review. The Road Trauma Committee has discussed this and the hospitals are talking about it through their constituent bodies.

I strongly urge the Treasurer to take into consideration the quite proper approach that has been made to him by one of the largest hospitals in Melbourne in the hope that hospitals may be relieved of this responsibility, except in cases determined after a reasonable examination by the Attorney-General to see whether the legislation is worth while and has achieved what it was hoped it would achieve. Subject to that examination by the AttorneyGeneral, perhaps there could be an immediate amendment of the principal Act. Section 80D (3) states-

A certificate purporting to be signed by a person who purports to be a legally qualified medical practitioner in or to the effect of Schedule Six shall be admitted in evidence in any proceedings referred to in subsection (1) as prima facie proof of the facts and matters therein contained.

Mr. Wilkes.

If that power is provided to medical practitioners as prima facie proof but is used in only one case out of 326 from one hospital-no doubt the results at the Royal Melbourne Hospital, Prince Henry's Hospital, Alfred Hospital and St. Vincent's Hospital would be similar-then it is time the Government did something about it and allowed hospitals to do the work that they want and intend to do. There must be some other way to determine the blood alcohol level of a person who has been involved in an accident but was not the driver of the vehicle. It has been proved conclusively that the blood samples are not needed, so what is the point of continuing to take them? The Treasurer is now making suggestions across the table, but he should remember that the legislation was thoroughly debated in this House. The Opposition did not walk away from it then, and will not walk away from it now.

The Opposition hopes that the Treasurer, with the Attorney-General, will make a proper examination of the effect of the legislation. It may well be that with his legal training the Treasurer can satisfy hims'elf that this should apply only to drivers. I am not prepared to make that assessment off the top of my head, but I ask that the Treasurer make that suggestion to the AttorneyGeneral to relieve the hospitals of this responsibility.

Mr. CAIN (Bundoora): I desire to make a few brief remarks about expenditure on the trimming of social welfare staff. I suggest to the Committee that some saving could be effected by the Social Welfare Department if it were to consider making use of premises known as the Loyola Training Centre in Grimshaw Street, Watsonia, which are used for the training of welfare staff. The use of the centre must, I believe, caus'e expenditure by the department that is not justified. To those who are not familiar with it, I point out that it is a very large old building erected


some 40 years ago as a seminary for priests. It is a 3-story building consisting of a number of small buildings which were designed for the purpose of training priests. It is surrounded by 12 acres of land.

The dep'artment is maintaining and servicing this large building and the grounds around it as a training centre for staff of the Social Welfare Department. I suggest that is not a prudent utilization of the funds allocated to that department. I appreciate that the building was not purchased by the Government for that purpose. It was purchased for another purpose and the Government encountered some difficulties about using it. It is being used for its present purpose for reasons of expediency, not reasons based upon the best use of the building. I believe-and I suggest this to the Government and to the Minister -the work done there can be carried out in premises close to the centres of population from where the trainees are drawn, which would be more accessible to them. The continued use by the department of this building is a waste of public funds and ought to be stopped at the earliest possible time.

Mr. DUNSTAN: Does the Government now own the building and the grounds?

Mr. CAIN: I understand that the Government is purchasing the building under a contract of sale which has very favourable terms. In deference to your ruling, Mr. Chairman, and not arguing the reason for the purchase of the building and the capital expenditure incurred as a result, the present use of the building is totally uneconomic and ought to be stopped at the earliest possible time.

Mr. DOUBE (Albert Park): I wish to refer to boxing under the heading of Youth, Sport and Recreation. A large number of people in Australia are concerned at the number of serious accidents which take place in this sport-if one can really call them accidents. They are accidents in the sense that the person who actually delivers the blow does not intend to

cause serious injury. It seems to me tha t if a sport exists which allows a participant to deliver a blow to a portion of the body where it is likely to result in killing someone or making him a paraplegic, then we are an insensitive community.

The sport of boxing has altered somewhat over the past 200 years. I think it was at the turn of the eighteenth century that eye gouging, biting and hitting below the belt were eliminated from the sport. Nothing much has been done to alter the rules since then. It is true that the Marquis of Queensberry rules in the 1880s brought in some further refinements, but it is perfectly clear to everyone that a sport which allows a person to score a point by hitting someone else on the head is not a sport at all. It is true that a hit below the belt to a boxer can cause a discomforting situation, but I do not know that anyone has ever been killed by such a blow. Yet, for 200 years that type of blow has been banned.

I ask the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation to make representations to the appropriate bodies to ban hitting above the shoulder. In other words, the main target in boxing would be that area above the belt and below the collar bone.

·Mr. BIRRELL: Not to the front, but to the back?

Mr. DOUBE: No, to the front. Although people may say that this will ruin the sport, it will be recalled that this was said when eye gouging, biting and hitting below the belt were banned.

Mr. DUNSTAN: You will be banning politics soon.

Mr. DOUBE: One can be mentally wounded by politics, but I have not heard of anyone in Australia being killed as a result of it.

Mr. DUNSTAN: Not in a Liberal electorate.

Mr. DOUBE: No, that is the wonder of it. It does seem to me that our community is very foolish if it allows people to deliberately engage in a


sport in which the intention is to punch someone on the head. As I think the Minister pOinted out, since the introduction of padded 6-oz. or 7 -oz. gloves there is now much more danger of death resulting than in the times when bare knuckles were used.

Mr. DIXON: I do not think that is true.

Mr. DOUBE: In that case the hon-orable gentleman did not say it, but somebody else did. I must admit I thought it was the Minister. I have heard it strongly suggested that the use of gloves causes most damage in a hit to the head.

Mr. DUNSTAN: The member for Geelong North said that.

Mr. DOUBE: Yes, I have solved that one. Some of the best authorities on injuries to the head of boxers would be those people who deal with brain damage. It was put to me on one occasion that a person is safer being hit on the head by a cricket ball or a golf ball than being hit by a medicine ball or by a fist enclosed in a glove. When a hard ball hits the skull there is a certain amount of bounce away from the head at the point of impact, but in a hit by a 14-oz medicine ball, or a 7 -oz glove with a fist inside it, this bouncing effect does not happen. Brain damage occurs from the sharp movement of the head. The point was made that although the head moves sharply to one side, the unsupported brain mass crashes against the internal wall of the skull. That is supposed to be the reason why boxing with gloves is much more dangerous than fighting with bare knuckles.

Mr. DIXON: Can you give me an authority which states this?

Mr. DOUBE: I cannot name the person who supports this view, but I am putting it forward as a proposition which the Minister should examine. The Minister should speak to the brain specialists in the community.

,Mr. DIXON: There was a farreaching inquiry into this matter three years ago.

Mr. DOUBE: Perhaps the Minister is in a position to tell us what happened then. There is obvious danger in allowing people to punch each other on the head in this sport. I believe the damage is heightened because boxers now wear gloves and there is a more sustained type of damage than there is from the sharp impact of a tennis, cricket or golf ball.

Mr. SKEGGS: Or from bare knuckles.

Mr. DOUBE: I am putting forward that proposition. A person might get lacerations around the face and head from being struck with bare knuckles, but they do not run the great risk of brain damage that there is from being hit with a padded glove. It is time the Government examined the matter.

Mr. DIXON: No other Government in Australia has done as much as the Victorian Government. The honorable member's party has done nothing.

Mr. DOUBE: We are specifically discussing hitting on the head. I have seen no evidence that the Government has done anything about this. The sport should be reduced to hitting between the collar bone and the navel, or the belt line, wherever that is these days. No notice should be taken of people who say the sport would be spoiled as a spectacle. We are a guilty community if we allow people to be at risk by being hit around the head, with the grave knowledge that there is danger in the situation.

Mr. DIXON: There is grave danger in most sports.

-Mr. DOUBE: Yes, but I know of no sport in which a person is deliberately kneed in the back or deliberately hit by someone with the intention of scoring a point by hitting him in that place. Football, at which the Minister for Social Welfare was a shining star, is a different proposition. It is true that there are exceptions, but no rule


In football allows one player to strike another on the head, whereas boxers are permitted to hit each other with 6-oz 7 -oz or 8-oz gloves. Boxing rul~ shouid be altered so that it is not permissible for contestants to hit the head. A sharpened foil is not used in fencing, or a sharpened sabre in sabre fighting. It is absurd to imagine that this sport, which places one of the participants at grave risk, should be allowed to continue. The Minister for Social Welfare might suggest to the Minister of Education that an inquiry should be made into schools where boxing is encouraged to ascertain whether the practice of scoring points by hitting people on the head can be stopped, because it places the person who is hit at desperate risk.

The other point I raise is connected with the Chief Secretary's Department and again concerns the problem of traffic. I am inclined to agree, when I consider the system of traffic signs in the State, that we have gone overboard and that there are far too many markings on the road. So far as I can ascertain, England does not have this elaborate system of dotted lines as well as continuous lines. Froni memory, the English system has a series of double lines when one enters another road, and the person has to stop and has no right of way if another vehicle is approaching. The introduction not only of the double continuous lines, but of the double dotted lines, is causing extreme confusion to the motorist.

Some weeks ago in the House I asked the relevant Minister to approach the Chief Secretary to ascertain whether traffic policemen could be supplied in Beaconsfield Parade in peak periods. I pointed out that over a distance of three miles there is only one set of traffic lights, and in peak periods people have almost no chance of crOSSing the road to the beach front. On that occasion I almost challenged the athletic Minister for Social Welfare to try it some time. Motorists travel at about 40 miles an hour and there are no breaks in the

traffic. People attempting to cross the road do so at great risk. I have asked the Chief Secretary to provide traffic policemen in those areas w~en the traffic is heavy. I have receIved no answer to my representations. One wonders whether making a request in the House has any impact on Ministers. It seems they listen and do nothing.

Pending the introduction of automatic lights which are eventually to be installed in that road, I again ask the Minister to ascertain whether it is possible to provide traffic policemen so that breaks in the traffic can be made to enable pedestrians to cross the road with some degree of safety.

Mr. TREWIN (Benalla): I point out the inability of the Public Works Department, I suppose as a matter of policy and also because of lack of available finance, to provide accommodation for public servants in the City of Benalla. On two occasions the State Accommodation Committee has been advised by the Benalla City Council, with the support of local people, that there is an urgent need for this accommodation. Benalla has a set of public offices which were opened in 1960 by the late Sir Thomas Malt by, who was then Minister of Public Works. Part of those offices was made available to the Police Department and various other Government departments then in Benalla. Since then there has been a dramatic increase in the number of Government departments transferring on a regional or sectional basis to the city, and no further consideration has been given to providing accommodation for the public servants.

In the past few years the regional educational directorate has been centred in Benalla. The Department of Agriculture has opened a regional office and has extended the existing sectional office. The Soil Conservation Authority has extended its section, and the Housing Commission has opened a regional office. The Environment Protection Authority has also located its north-eastern


regional office in Benalla. The regional veterinary centre is at Benalla but, because of its peculiar work in the Department of Agriculture, it has its own accommodation. Therefore, it is catered for. The Government departments I have mentioned have established regional offices at Bendigo without considering the need for permanent accommodation. One after the other, they have located themselves in temporary accommodation around the city. As further personnel will be appointed, the need for office accommodation is extremely urgent.

A proposal has been submitted by private interests which has received the blessing of the officers of the Public Works Department, but because of a system which I think is peculiar-it may be necessary to have this type of system in the department-the department will not enter into a lease unless the foundations for the intended structure have been laid. Naturally, those who desire to build will not invest unless they have some guarantee of leasing the accommodation.

Consequently, after about eighteen months little progress has been made. I am aware that the Government has committed itself to the provision of offices at Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo, and that until they are completed or close to completion the Government will not commit itself further.

The project at BenalIa could be undertaken by private interests and erected on Crown land. The present site of the public offices at Benalla is adequate for a further building of the necesslary size. Under the Victorian Public Offices Corporation Act and in conjunction with the Lands Department, the temporary transfer of land to these private interests could be arranged so that the structure could be erected. That is the only way I can see the necessary accommodation being made available for the public servants who have been or will be transferred to BenalIa and

Mr. Trewin.

those who may be appointed to the respective departments from the local population.

The matter is urgent and I seek some response from the Minister of Public Works or the Treasurer. The Police Department can use all of the available public office accommodation in Benalla because the department is expanding and has a need for extensive offices.

In passing, today, the State Electricity Commission celebrates the 50th anniversary of the establishment of offices at Benalla and the Country Roads Board will do likewise next year. Both of these authorities have, from their own resources, provided the necessary accommodation.

Another item that I raise for the attention of the Government relates to division No. 576, agricultural education. The two older agricultural colleges in Victoria, Dookie and Longerenong, one of which is situated in my electorate and the other in the electorate of Lowan, have for many years provided the opportunity for agricultural education in this State. From time to time, reference has been made in this Chamber to the need for library facilities at various schools. On this occasion, I refer to the libraries ,at the two agricultural colleges.

At Dookie, accommodation for the library has been provided in the dining hall, but unfortunately the library is open only between the hours of 10 a.m. and 4.30 p.m. For most of this time, the students are either attending lectures or working in the field and are therefore unable to use the facilities. The students cannot take books away from the library and, although the library at the Dookie College is excellent, because of the inability of the Department of Agriculture to employ sufficient library personnel, the facilities are not available outside the hours that I have mentioned. The college has an untrained librarian to look after the books, but the students


have to use their own initiatives to obtain any necessary reference book. Again, this can only be done during the hours mentioned. It is a difficult and unsatisfactory position for the students who are preparing themselves for their future way of life.

At Longerenong Agricultural College the position is also unsatisfactory because of the lack of facilities, let alone the necessary staff, to assist students in their education. I appeal to the Government and to the Department of Agriculture to provide the necessary library facilities to enable the students to further their education.

Mr. TREZISE (Geelong North): I did not intend to enter the debate but as the sport of boxing has been referred to I wish to make some comments based on my own views. It is marvellous how, in the past three or four months, many individuals have jumped on the bandwagon trying to ban boxing or to bring in reforms to the sport. So far as I can see, these people have expressed few progressive ideas.

In many sports other than boxing, damage can occur to the participant. Even in the last cricket season, two or three persons were killed in Australia, whilst a rider was killed in horse racing about two months ago, and another was killed in motor-bike racing about six months ago. Overall, the statistics of injuries in other sports would be far higher than in boxing.

Earlier today, the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation said that Victoria had led the way in Australia in bringing in some controls over boxing. In all fairness the first Government to take action to institute an inquiry into the sport was the Federal Government under Mr. Whitlam. So far as Victoria is concerned, Hansard records will show that, over the past twelve years, the main fighter for boxing reforms has been the Australian Labor Party. For the past twelve years, I have spoken around the

community and through newspapers, on television and over radio of the need for regulation of the sport. This is in direct contrast to representatives of the present Government, including the former Chief Secretaries, Mr. John Rossiter and the late Sir Arthur Rylah, and many other individuals. In this House, time and time again members of the Labor Party have contended that it was time to introduce safety requirements to the sport of boxing.

The Victorian Government brought in controls on boxing in the past twelve months only because of what happened in Geelong. An innocent lad was slaughtered because of the lack of control over boxing in Victoria. I refer to Philip Marr from Geelong, who died after a street tent fight at a gala day celebration approximately eighteen months ago. The bout should not have talren place because the lad was not examined physically to ascertain whether he was fit to fight. There was little protection for that boy in that bout.

It was only as a result of an outcry from the public that the Government, many years behind time, brought in legislation and regulations to control boxing in Victoria. Therefore, for the Government to say that it took all the initiatives is certainly far from the mark, according to the records.

Although boxing is controlled to some extent in Victoria, many more steps need to be taken. I refer to the people who have control of the boxer when he enters the boxingring. I refer to the trainer, the seconds, and the referee who is in charge of the bout. In Victoria and in other States of Australia any person can climb into the ring with a boxer. However, when a lad has perhaps a cut eye or concussion or other injuries, between or during rounds his safety is solely in the hands of the person in his corner, who in most cases has little knowledge of first aid.

674 Supply (1976-77, [ASSEMBL Y.] No. 1) Bill.

The law should be amended to provide that all registered professional boxing trainers in Victoria-professional boxing is the only boxing under control-should be required to have a first aid certificate so that they can recognize the effects, the signs and the results of concussion. They should also know how to treat cut eyes and bruises and so on between rounds. At present such treatment is often left in the hands of quacks.

In Australia the main qualification for a referee of a boxing bout seems to be that he was a good boxer or fighter in the past. In Victoria there are more than twenty referees who have been great boxers. To name a few, I refer to men like Terry Reilly, AI. Bastin, Max Carlos, Johnny Wheeler. They have all refereed the main bouts at the stadium for some time because they were boxers themselves. They may have a knowledge of first aid and recognize concussion, but it does not make them good referees. Two other referees are Vic. Patrick and Jimmy Carruthers, who used to be good fighters but may have little knowledge of first aid.

It would be a good idea if regulations or rules were brought in to ensure that referees were independent of the promoters who arrange the bouts. In Victoria a referee's decision not only means thousands of dollars to a fighter, but also the referee is employed by the promoter, who stands to make many thousands of dollars if that promoter's fighter wins. The referee who is employed by the promoter certainly leaves himself open to criticism; he should be independent.

The suggestion of my colleaguein all fairness he is entitled to his own opinion-that headguards should be worn by boxers is certainly out of the question. If boxers were to wear headguards, the sport might as well be banned altogether. This practice would eliminate half of the participants because a person is

Mr. Trezise.

either a boxer or a fighter. A fighter relies on heavy, hard punching to wear his opponent down and to attack his opponent, and if headguards were required by regulation, this would eliminate him from the sport altogether.

Moreover, for a person from overseas to come to Victoria and lay his title on the line would be out of the question because he would have to fight under rules which may not suit him. In other words he could not get a knock out in Victoria. Any person from overseas or from another State who came to Victoria and put his title on the line against a boxer would be a fool.

If fighters were required to wear headguards, what would be the difference between a professional fighter and an amateur fighter? I asked this question of the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation today. His department considers that any person under the age of eighteen years should not fight in a professional bout. I presume this is for safety reasons, but it is certainly contradictory to other views held by the department. In Victoria, any boy of nine or ten years of age can box in amateur ranks. I should like the Minister, who is not in the House at present, to tell me why a person of 16 years or 17 years can fight a three-round bout in an amateur bout but cannot fight a similar bout over three rounds in the professional ring?

If it is a question of safety, the Minister should tell the House what the difference is between amateur bouts and professional bouts. I do not believe there is any difference. I believe boxing is a healthy sport which not only improves the individual physically, but also aids his mental development. It is a sport in which people in every country of the world participate. It is an Olympic sport which must build up international goodwill. If too many restrictions are imposed on the sport Victoria will be out of step with the rest of Australia and the world.


Mr. WILTON (Broadmeadows): Earlier today the Minister of Education was asked questions without notice about the current financial crisis that is confronting the technical schools in Victoria. The honorable gentleman indicated that some action will be taken and that possibly some emergency funds will be available before the end of the financial year.

I wonder whether the Minister really understands the problem. He certainly knows about it because it has existed for three years or more. He will recall that last year I telephoned him from the office of a technical school that was in such a financial situation that it could not pay its wages bill for that week. It was necessary for a cheque from the Minister's office to be hand delivered so that the staff could be paid. This state of affairs has been going on for some years to my knowledge.

Today, the Minister of Education referred to the technical and further education funds that will be directed from the Federal Government to the schools. The point is that this money is received not on a monthly or weekly basis but on a periodical basis. A considerable time elapses from when the school incurs the expenditure until it receives a refund under the Technical and Further Education scheme.

That is only part of the problem. The Minister is aware, as are all other honorable members who have had any experience with technical schools, that many people from business and industry give many hours free service as members of school councils. In most cases they do not have a personal interest in the school inasmuch as their children do not attend the schools, but they bring certain expertise to school councils as a result of their private employment in the local area. I put it to the Minister of Education that it is objectionable for these

people serving on the school council to have to suffer the indignity of having letters written by sections of the Minister's department threatening to cut off supplies to the school unless certain accounts are paid. The Minister would know why the accounts are not paid-because of the inadequacy of the maintenance grants.

What I find most objectionable is that the Minister tried to explain the problem by rising in the House and telling honorable members that there is some money coming from a particular area and that the cheques will be forwarded by the end of the financial year. It seems extraordinary to me that part of the money which is to be allocated in this measure before the Committee will find its way back to the Treasury through the payment of pay-roll tax. In Division No. 307, an amount of $64·2 million has been provided for salaries, general expenses and other services and I suggest that part of that money will find its way back into the Treasury by way of pay-roll tax payments. Those payments total a considerable sum over the financial year.

As treasurer of one of these school councils, when confronted with having insufficient funds to meet our commitments, my advice to the school council was not to pay the pay-roll tax and to let the Minister of Education sue the school council. As treasurer, I was not prepared to recommend that funds which were needed for class materials for students should be used to pay pay-roll tax. It is absolutely ridiculous and no argument can be advanced by the Government to justify its levying pay-roll tax on non-profit service industries, such as education. It has been going on since the State has had the authority to levy pay-roll tax.

The other problem is the indignity that teachers have to put up with because of this financial situation. They have to leave the class-room


and use up hours of their valuable time going around local industry scrounging for bits and pieces of material in order to keep their class programme operating. This practice is widespread and not confined to the area which I represent. The articles appearing in the daily press today reveal just how widespread is the practice.

I object to school principals having to deal with letters coming from various sections of the Education Department demanding payment. There is any number of them on the file, as the Minister of Education would know, where threats have been made that no more material will be supplied unless payment is made within seven days. These are the problems which the people who make up the school council have to sit down and grapple with when they should be taking initiatives to increase the role of technical education.

If the Minister of Education is having financial difficulty in. keeping maintenance grants at a level where schools can fulfil their obligations, the honorable gentleman should be prepared to give instructions to the department to cease sending out threatening letters demanding payment from school councils.

Why should a person holding a responsible position in industry or in a large industrial organization give up his time and make a contribution to the welfare and running of a school by serving on the school council and then have to waste his time dealing with these problems? As honorable members know, for years technical school councils have been administrators and not advisors. Those people who are prepared to accept their responsibility and make a contribution are to be commended, but if this goes on much longer there will be a large number of vacancies on technical school councils. I do not blame people for resigning. Why should they put up with such treatment? It is not good

Mr. Wilton.

enough to be going through this situation continually, almost monthly, with school councils having to appeal to their local members to make representations to the Minister of Education to obtain emergency finance to enable the school to carry on.

The State Electricity Commission would have large sums of money owing to it, just as the Gas and Fuel Corporation would have because of the inability of school councils to meet their commitments from the maintenance grants which are provided.

One of the things the Minister should be examining with the Treasurer is the continuation of this ridiculous situation of school councils having to pay pay-roll tax, particularly technical school councils, because, as I said before, part of the funds being approved in this measure will not be spent on education but will find their way back into the Treasury.

Another matter I wish to raise comes within the control of the Social Welfare Department. There are a number of local community advisory bureaux staffed by volunteers who are able to give voluntary service to a whole range of people in their community. A programme has been established whereby volunteers can undertake a three-week training course which has been approved by the Social Welfare Department.

As I understand it, the proposal was to staff these advisory bureaux with volunteers at no cost to the State or the local municipality. These organizations could fulfil a useful function in the community. Because of financial cut-backs by the Government, I have been advised that this three-week training course will now cease.

I ask the Minister for Social Welfare whether he will examine this matter with a view to ensuring that


sufficient finance is made available to allow the three-week training courses to continue.

Mr. AMOS (Morwell): I raise a matter under Division No. 680 relating to the Housing Co.mmission. I draw the attentIon of the Minister of Housing to a series of representations made over a period of years regarding the modernization of eld~rly citizens' flats in this State. Particularly I refer the Minister to representations originally made to the Housing Commission early in 1975 relating to the modernization of the laundries in the Housing Commission's elderly citizens' flats at Morwell. At that time I pointed out that the elderly pensioners resident in those flats which comprised a block of three stories had to get down on their hands and knees to light the old gas coppers. It was a feat that perhaps even many members of Parliament might sometimes find difficult, quite apart from the inherent danger that occurs whenever there is a windy day, and vacuums can be created in small rooms such as laundries. Nevertheless I thought the matter important enough to raise with the Minister, who in the early representations agreed that modernization should take place.

During the representations it was also pointed out that many of the pensioners had to take hot water from the kitchen to the bathroom, again a feat which is difficult for some of the frail aged pensioners concerned. A favourable response was also given to that matter by the Minister. That was early in 1975. The Minister decided that as soon as funds became available the necessary modernization programme would be put into effect. Now, in 1976, the funds are apparently still not available because the old gas coppers and the inadequate hot water facilities in these pensioner flats have not been replaced and the pensioners still have to put up with the poor services.

Following the representations, I directed further correspondence to the Chairman of the Gas and Fuel Corporation about the modernization of the old, solid fuel-fi~ed heaters in these elderly penSIoner flats. The situation exists in a 3-story block of flats, mainly occupied by frail age pensioners, of the peI?-sioners being required to carry their briquettes or wood up three flig~ts of stairs if they live on the third story and then to dispose of the remains of the briquettes or charcoal, having to cart that ash down the three flights of stairs again. To overcome that hardship I made direct representations to the Chairman of the Gas and Fuel Corporation seeking his advice, and representations were then made to the Director of the Housing Commission and then the two permanent heads got together and agreed to a programme whereby the old solid fuel-fired heaters would be phased out and replaced by modem gas space heaters. A reply came back from the Gas and Fuel Corporation that it had negotiated with the Housing Commission. A reply came back from the Housing Commission that it had agreed to the representations and that the replacement of the old fuelfired gas heaters with modem space heaters would be carried out. That was before last winter. It is now autumn of 1976, more than twelve months later, and no programme has been put into effect. Last year, after waiting until 14th October, I directed a question without notice to the then Minister of Housing through the Minister of Transport. I asked-

1. Whether the programme for replacing solid fuel heaters with modern gas spaceheaters in Housing Commission elderly citizen flats has been instituted?

2. When the replacement programme will commence in Morwell and when it is expected to be completed?

The Minister replied, "Yes" to the first question and to the second the honorable gentleman replied-

Because of shortage of capital funds this financial year the Housing Commission has had to put back its modernization pro-


gramme for units constructed in 1960. As the elderly person units in Morwell were completed in 1964 and 1966 it is not now possible to say when the programme for these years will commence.

At the time it was difficult to accept the answer, particularly when I considered that through my representations to the Chairman of the Gas and Fuel Corporation and the Director of Housing, the Housing Commission and the Minister had agreed to this change-over programme, that because of the shortage of funds, almost every other area in the State with elderly citizens' flats would receive the benefit of my representations except my electorate.

With this in mind I raised the matter again with the Minister of Housing on 25th November, 1975, because I was concerned that the pensioners in these flats were being seriously inconvenienced and needed these new facilities. I asked the Minister of Housing-

Whether the Minister will make funds available to allow the provision of facilities in the elderly pensioners' flats in Morwell sought by the pensioners; if not, as housing applicants, free of any means test, are able to purchase Churchill homes built with State funds whether such funds could be made avail~ble by reducing the Churchill dwelling programme by one house?

The Minister replied, cc Yes ". I should like the Minister of Housing to take note of what I am about to say. The series of questions that I had directed to the Minister about the provision of housing at Churchill and the provisions of the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement had clearly indicated that the Housing Commission was able to offer houses at Churchill for purchase by childless couples and by couples who did not have to meet the conditions of the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement, as did Housing Commission tenants everywhere else in the State. Why was that so? The answer given by the Minister was that the Housing Commission was constructing with State funds new brick veneer homes at Churchill which were avail-

Mr. Amos.

able free of means test to anybody. This was at a time when the Parliament and the Victorian public were being told about the scarcity of State resources. It seems that the Victorian Government was prepared to allow the Housing Commission to build new brick veneer homes, costing upwards of $30,000 and make them available with no means test to childless couples who could have two incomes coming in in excess of $400 a week, but the commission was not prepared to assist elderly, frail folk on the pension who were in need of assistance from the Government.

A simple request was therefore made which was the basis of the answer to which I referred earlier. Is the Government prepared to provide the facilities for which we had fought by simply reducing the Churchill building programme by one house? That would involve perhaps $30,000 and, considering the Churchill building programme and the amount of State money, scarce as it is, that was being put into that programme, it surely was not a hard request. Be that as it may, the Minister replied, cc Yes". That was on 25th November, 1975, and now, on 6th May, 1976, those requests for the replacement of the solid-fuel heaters with modern gas space heaters have still not been met.

In the short time available before the winter finally hits Victoria I implore the Minister to recognize the representations that were previously made, to recognize the assurances given by his predecessor and to allow the modernization programme to commence without delay.

Mr. EDMUNDS (Ascot Vale): I want to point out to the Government that the section of the Supply Bill dealing with courts administration, which covers salaries, general expenses and other services, refers to all the courts in Victoria. I direct attention to the Children's Court and the


Children's Court Clinic. Their procedures, in my view, leave little to criticize, but from time to time disturbing evidence emerges that the provisions of the Act dealing with Children's Courts and their procedures are not strictly adhered to. Recently articles have appeared in Melbourne daily newspapers stating that the Ombudsman has discovered that the Police Department has been supplying information about Children's Court offences concerning applicants for positions in the Victorian Railways. There has been an underground route of information on offences by children, and these have reappeared later in their lives to prevent them from being accepted into the Public Service.

The Children's Court Act No. 8477 is quite clear on this point. Apart ,from cases where permission is granted by the Attorney-General, it is stated-

No person shall furnish information relating to proceedings in a children's court to any person who is not entitled under sub-section (4) to inspect the register.

The maximum penalty provided for such an offence is $2,000. One would expect the Government to have made an allowance in the Supply Bill to ensure that the information service which the police have been providing will now be closed 'Off for ever. I should like to receive an assurance from the Minister of Special Education, who now represents the Chief Secretary, on whether provision has been provided in the Budget to ensure that no longer will the armed services, Public Service departments, insurance companies, credit reference services and similar organizations have the opportunity to delve into what ought properly to be sacrosanct information.

Another matter that I wish to point out to the Government has received little recognition or financial assistance. I refer to rent controlsalaries and general expenses. The housing stock market, the building industry, invest'Ors in flat develop-

ment, the capital available for home construction and even the activities of the Victorian Housing Commission have been curtailed and are in declining circumstances at present, and this puts a great deal of pressure on the provision of rental accommodation. The staff and services of the Rental Investigation Bureau work in depressing circumstances with little real authority 'Other than the power to make recommendations. The authority which the bureau had many years ago has been stripped away, and it is a matter of record that the Government believes that the market dictates the cost of rental accommodation. Disadvantaged people who are not able to defend themselves can be taken for a ride in regard to rental, but those who can afford to pay higher rents are often in a better position.

Governments generally have a direct responsibility to look after disadvantaged people, because thousands of complaints about the rackets inv'Olved in rental accommodation are investigated by the Rental Investigations Bureau during the year throughout Victoria. The Government should allocate more public money to ensure that landlords, tenants, lessors and lessees have the opportunity to seek arbitration on difficult matters of opinion without being disadvantaged. At present, if a tenant or lessee complains about anything, it is the first step towards his eviction. Agents believe that if tenants act that way, it is best to start proceedings on behalf of the owners to push them out.

The Supply Bill provides the opportunity to honorable members to point these things out to the Government, and I should like to see some action taken in respect of the matters I have raised.

Mr. JONES (Melbourne): I direct attention to two related items, No. 720 and No. 750, which refer to transport and railways. The planners of Victorian public transport have failed to make provision for research to be


undertaken on public transport. It is strange that the Victorian Railways, the Melbourne and Metropolitan Tramways Board and the Transport Regulation Board have no facilties to test independently the state of the rolling-stock that they buy. They purchase stock from overseas and accept the wonderful assurances given to them by the contractors, but there are no independent scientific facilities for testing the quality of vehicles used for public transport.

Such facilities exist in a number of tertiary institutions, but they are limited in scope. I am concerned that the Ministers of Transport have operated on an ad hoc basis for years. The Ministry of Transport has not been notable for its long-term planning, and for the past half a century Ministers of Transport-I exempt Labor Ministers-have not been forward planners.

An HONORABLE MEMBER: What about Sir Arthur Warner?

Mr. JONES: Sir Arthur Warner was certainly a great forward planner; he aimed at nothing less than the destruction of the system and went a good deal of the way towards achieving that goal.

I take an obvious example of the dreadful "red rattlers" that run between Melbourne and Geelong. They have no hydraulic dampers or shock absorbers and there is a high incidence of vertical vibration, which makes for an unpleasant ride. You will be grieved to know, Mr. Speaker, that it is worse when traveHing first class becaus·e, the fact that the firstclass compartment seats contain springs makes the vertical vibration worse, so one would be wise, even if using a gold pass, not to travel first class. By interjection, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggests that it might be preferable to travel standing up.

Millions of dollars are spent on public transport rolling-stock, including buses, trams and trains, but no independent means of testing them exists. I believe this is scandalous. The Ministry of Transport tends to go from the planning stage directly to the contractors and then back to the public, so the role of the engineer, which is to test the rolling-stock, is left out in between.

I should like to ensure that by the time the next Supply Bill is introduced, some action will be taken by the Ministry of Transport to provide independent testing facilities for roIling-stock. This is enormously important and could go a long way towards saving the public a great deal of money. A small investment in this area could have an enormous public return.

Mr. WHITING (Mildura): Two items in this Supply Bill concern me at this stage. One relates to the Chief Secretary's Department and the operation of the Metcon and Statcon systems in Victoria. Motorists who drive in the m1etropolitan area and then visit a country centre are confused when they find that the Statcon provisions have not been introduced into the country and that they still have to give way to vehicles on their right. When there are no give-way signs and no stop signs a great deal of trouble is caused to motorists and they have to sort out what they should be doing at a particular time.

I shall quote one instance which concerns a constituent of mine. This man, although rather elderly, had a blameless driving career. He was travelling along the Calder Highway through the town of Wedderbum and saw, waiting at an unsealed "T" intersection which entered the highway, a police vehicle. My constituent slowed down, expecting the vehicle to make a right-hand turn. It did not


do so and he proceeded at a speed of about 2 kilometres an hour, only to be followed by the policemen and given an on-the-spot-ticket for $45. If Statcon is to be used in Victoria it should cover at least the major highways in the State and should apply to all highway intersections. Even though it is not possible to paint white lines across unsealed roads, give-way signs should be erected. If this were carried out, motorists would appreciate that on a State highway they had priority and this would then govern their driving habits.

By and large the Metcon system has be'en established throughout the metropolitan area. There are many areas of the State where the system has not been brought into operation by the Road Safety and Traffic Authority. There is scope for the Chief Secretary to use his endeavours to improve the driving habits of motorists and reduce the road toll in Victoria by the means I have suggested.

The other area I am concerned about is education. Honorable members have heard a great deal in the past week or two concerning the visit to Canberra by a number of people interested in education, and the amount of money it is expected will be received from the Commonwealth Government. However, there is still the problem of the regional system of education in Victoria which has not finally been solved. There has to be a period to allow for teething troubles. This is expected, and I am not greatly unhappy about that, but this morning I asked the Minister of Education a question about the formula which is to be developed to fund the eleven educational regions of this State. He indicated that this formula had not yet been decided upon. The regional directors in those areas are not certain what percentage of the funds will be available for capital

expenditure or recurrent expenditure in the forthcoming financial year. This will have to be decided quickly to allow those regional directors to properly plan the programmes within their region.

For example, the Mildura South Primary School has an enrolment of 298 children. The classes at present are comprised of more than 30 children, 'except the two preparatory grades-one of which has 26 and the other 29. All the other classes have approximately 33 to 35 childreneven the composite class of grades 5 and 6. The committee of this school is greatly concerned that the school does not have a proper library, part of the corridor being used for that purpose. There is not an art/craft room of any sort, and the school is grossly overcrowded in almost every other room. There is one portable class-room. Another class-room consists of a converted shelter shed.

There is also what is known as a Bristol class-room-two class-rooms side by side. This is made of aluminium and in the hot months of the year it is unbearable. The committee has planted trees alongside the building in an endeavour to reduce the temperature, but this is only partially effective. I believe this school has a strong case for additional class-rooms, a library and art/craft facilities. The ironical part about this ~s that an art/craft teacher was appointed to the school this year but has nowhere in which to operate effiCiently.

I appreciate that the regional director has this school high on the list of work to be done in the near future, but until the formula for funding these regions is decided upon, the regional directors and the other people involved with education in the regions cannot make final decisions on future planning, nor can they

682 Supply (1976-77, No. 1) Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] The Ministry.

make recommendations in areas which are extremely important. Even when this problem is solved, the Public Works Department has to organize plans and specifications, call for tenders and let them before building starts.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Mc,Laren): I suggest to the honorable member, as I did to others, that he is going into the area of works and services in discussing new buildings. I think the honorable member has canvassed that point, but I bring it to his attention.

Mr. WHITING: The other point I wish to make concerns local government This was canvassed fully in a debate in the House. It is obvious that local government will also have to be advised in the near future what additional funds it is to receive from the new Federal system which will operate under this Bill. If local government is given sufficient notice it can go into greater and more efficient planning than it has been able to do in the past.

Although much has been heard in the past few days of the problems of primary industry in country areas, I consider that the people who are disadvantaged at present will have to be given additional consideration by the Treasurer on current finances being made available in many areas. This can be done through the Forests Commission, the Soil Conservation Authority, the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission, and so on, by additional funds being made available for works that may not have been high on the priority list, but which can be included in the programmes of those departments so that the people who are unable to find employment and who are not earning any income from their farming pursuits may be employed in some kind of State benefit work which will bring them in some income. Therefore, J hope the Treasurer will have a serious look at the situation

in the near future, and I trust that he will offer some solution to the serious problems confronting the State at present.

The clause was agreed to.

The Bill was reported to the House without amendment, and passed through its remaining stages.

THE MINISTRY.

Mr. HAMER (Premier and Treasurer) (by leave) : I desire to inform the House that the Honorable A. 'J. Hunt, M.L.C., has relinquished the appointment of Attorney-General, and that the Honorable Haddon Storey, Q.C., M.L.C., has been appointed to that office.

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.

Mr. HAMER (premier and Treasurer): I move, by leave-

That James Halford Ramsay, Esquire, M.P., be appointed as a delegate to the proposed convention to review the operation of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia.

This appointment is necessary to provide a replacement for the Honorable Vernon Wilcox, who is not now a member of this House. Other consequential arrangements are to be made, but they can be made at a later date. The organizers of the convention have to be informed by the end of the month of the name of our replacement delegate.

Mr. WILKES (Northcote): Leave is granted. Opposition members have no objection to the attitude of the Premier and his Government. In fact, we are delighted to know that this may mean that the Government will not boycott the next meeting of the Constitutional Convention.

The motion was agreed to.

The House adjourned at 4.14 p.m. until Tuesday, May 11.

Questions [6 MAY, 1976.] on Notice. 683

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE.

The foUowing answers to questions on notice were circulated-

MILK CONSUMPTION.

(Question No. 142)

Mr. FOGARTY (Sunshine) asked the Minister of Agriculture-

What was the consumption rate of whole milk under the control of the Milk Board per unit of population within Victoria in 1960 and for each of the years from 1970 to 1975 inclusive?

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture): The answer is-

Milk Board records of per capita consumption rates are maintained on the basis of financial years rather than calender years. Statistics for the financial years nearest those requested are as follows-

Financial year

1959-60

1960-61

1969-70

1970-71

1971-72

1972-73

1973-74

1974-75

Annual per capita

consumption (gallons)

28'755

28'675

27·249

27'594

27'383

27·501

26·856

25·727

INDUSTRIAL NOISE.

(Question No. 165)

M. ROPER (Brunswick) asked the Assistant Minister of Health for the Minister of Health- '

Whether the Commission of Public Health in respect of industrial noise, has examined the National Health and Medical Research Council report entitled Model Regulations of Hearing Conservation; if so, when, and whether recommendations have been made to the Government; and, in that eVlent what recommendations; if not, why?

. Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health): The answer supplied by the Minister of Health is-

1. No.

2. An expert committee chairt.~ by the DePllo/. Chief Health Officer is at present ex:ammmg the report and preparing a statement for the consideration of the Commission of Public Health. It is hoped that the committee will be in a position to report to the commission before the end of June, 1976.

BUS SERVICES IN GEELONG AREA.

(Question No. 190)

Mr. TREZISE (Geelong North) asked the Minister of Transport-

What financial subsidies have been allocated to each of the bus services in the Geelong area, indicating the respective categories of each such allocation?

Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport): The answer is-

It would not be appropriate to disclose details of the subsidies payable to companies operating bus services in the Geelong area without the prior agreement of the companies concerned. Confidential information on the companies' financial position could be gleaned from this information.

INQUIRY INTO DAIRYING INDUSTRY.

(Question No. 207)


1. What amount was originally allocated for the Board of Inquiry into the Victorian Dairy Industry?

2. What was the Original estimate of cost and what is the present estimated cost of the inquiry?

3. When the third report of the inquiry will be received and tabled in the House?


1 and 2. The original estimated cost for the Board of Inquiry into the Victorian Dairy Industry was $100,000 of which $86,000 was allocated for expenditure during the 1974-75 financial year. The present estimate of cost of the inquiry is $223,750.

3. A report, which is supplementary to the first and second reports of ·the inquiry was tabled in the House on 5th May, 1976. The next report will be tabled prior to the 30th June, 1976.

684 Questions [ASSEMBLY.] on Notice.

HUNTINGDALE AND FERN TREE GULLY RAIL LINK.

(Question No. 216)

Mr. CRABB (Knox) asked the Minister of Transport-

Whether, as stated by the previous Minister, a rail link between Huntingdale and Fern Tree Gully will be completed within five years: if so-Ca) what will be the route of the rail-link; (b) how many homes are located within that route; and (c) how much time will be allowed for residents to object to any proposal prior to its implementation?

Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport): The answer is-

The 1969 Transportation Plan provided for the construction of a new railway line between Huntingdale and Fern Tree Gully stations.

In 1974, when detailed planning for this connection began, it became evident that a very much higher capital expenditure was required for a conventional railway than was envisaged in 1969.

As a result, and in view of development plans prepared recently by the City of Knox, it was decided to provide the connection by a less expensive means though generally following the alignment originally planned for the conventional railway.

A study is underway to enable a decision to be made on the reservation of a transportation corridor in the area. The corridor will be capable of accommodating an express busway or modern European-type tram or light rail system. The mode finally employed has not been decided at this stage. The study is being undertaken by a committee with officers from local Government and the transport and planning authorities.

Present planning is for the reservation of the transport corridor. No time-table has been set for construction. For the reservation of the corridor the normal town planning provisions will apply.

NURSING AIDE TRAINING.

(Question No. 244)

Mr. GINIFER (Keilor) asked the Assistant Minister of Health, for the Minister of Health-

1. If he will lay on the table of the Library the report submitted to the Vic-

torian Nursing Council relating to the curriculum of nurse aide training in Victoria?

2. Whether the Minister will undertake not to promulgate new regulations relating to nurse aide training until appropriate discussions are held with the management of geriatric centres?

Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health): The answer supplied by the Minister of Health is-

1. A report on the revision of the nursing aide training programme is being prepared by the Victorian Nursing Council's Nursing Aide Training Committee bu t has not yet been presented to the Victorian Nursing Council for its consideration and recommendations to the Minister of Health.

2. In February, 1976. the Minister of Health gave assurances to a deputation from the Victorian Hospitals Association that an opportunity would be given for nursing aide training schools to discuss the Victorian Nursing Council's recommendations on revision of the nursing aide training course prior to regulations being formulated to prescribe a new course and the Victorian Nursing Council was directed accordingly.

Similar assurances have been given in April, 1976, by the Minister of Health to representations made to him by individual nursing aide training schools on this matter.

GEM PIER, WILLIAMSTOWN.

(Question No. 262)

Mr. STIRLING (Williamstown) asked the Minister of Public Works-

1. Whether the chain wire fencing on Gem Pier, Williamstown, has been erected as a permanent structure?

2. Whether consideration was given to any other means of protection for vessels moored at the pier?

Mr. DUNSTAN (Minister of Public Works): The answer is-

1. Yes.

2. Fencing was the only means considered for providing the necessary protection. However, the arrangement of the fences received careful consideration in order to ensure the best possible access for the public to the end of the pier under the circumstances.


1Ilt gislatint mnunril. Tuesday, May 11, 1976.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett) took the chair at 4.53 p.m., and read the prayer.

THE MINISTRY.

The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary): Upon the passing of the Constitution (Responsible Ministers) Act, the Honorable A. J. Hunt, who was Attorney-General in the Hamer Government, resigned from that position, and the Honorable Haddon Storey was last Thursday sworn in as Attorney-General.


This Bill was received from the Assembly and, on the motion of the Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary), was read a first time.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE.

ALBURY-WODONGA DEVELOPMENT.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT (Melbourne Province): Is the Minister for State Development and Decentralization aware of the fear and frustration that exists in the AlburyWodonga area brought about, as reported in that area, by a disinclination to commitment by the Commonwealth and Victorian Governments? What is the commitment of the Victorian Government for the current year to that area and the purpose of the Minister's visit to Wodonga on 14th May?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister for State Development and Decentraliza tion) : I am not aware of the fear and frustration, as Mr. Elliot put it, in Albury-Wodonga regarding the lack of a firm commitment by the Federal Government for funding. I am, however, aware of what I would describe as an apprehension and I

Session 1976.-24

have made my attitude quite plain on this. The Victorian Government is naturally concerned about the lack of firm commitment concerning the funding of this project. The Premier has been pressing the Prime Minister and the Federal Government for an answer, which I should expect will be received before the end of this month at the latest.

As regards the second part of the question concerning the level of funding and the commitments for the current year, it will be impossible for the Victorian Government to make a firm statement of its commitment until the level of Federal funding is known.

The prime purpose of my visit this coming Friday to Albury-Wodonga is to meet the principals of the corporation to ascertain for myself the up-to-date situation on the development. Hopefully I was also to meet my New South Wales and Federal counterparts but for reasons of which the honorable member would be well aware, this latter objective, regrettably, is not now possible.

STATE GRANTS COMMISSION.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE (Northern Province) : Can the Minister for Local Government inform me whether applications by municipalities to the State grants commission when it is set up will be in the same form as those to the Commonwealth Grants Commission? Will the municipalities have the opportunity of making personal representation to the State grants commission on the same basis that they had to the Commonwealth Grants Commission in the past?

The Hon. A. J. HUNT (Minister for Local Government): It is not yet known whether time will permit that course to be adopted. This is a difficult year of changeover from one system to another and time for dealing with applications will be very limited. The Government has decided to use the material lodged with the Commonwealth Grants Commission together with information available

686 Questions [COUNCIL.] without Notice.

to that commission. This will be made available to be used as a general basis of assessment. However, where it appears necessary, every effort will be made to have consultation with the municipalities.

HUME FREEWAY.

The Hon. F. S. GRIMW ADE (Bendigo Province): My question is directed to the Minister for State Development and Decentralization representing the Minister of Transport. By way of explanation I point out that I travelled along the new Hume Freeway recently. It is a magnificent road which is superbly engineered and constructed. What worries me is that should there be an accident on this freeway, because it is a freeway with restricted access, there is no way in which people can go to the nearest farm house to call an ambulance or to get help. On most freeways emergency telephones are provided. Can the Minister advise me when it is planned that these emergency telephones will be installed on the freeway?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister for State Development and Decentralization): I understand that the Country Roads Board will examine the need for emergency telephones on the stretch of freeway that is referred to by the honorable member. If in the view of the board this need is substantiated, the telephones will be provided.

SYME-TOWNSEND REPORT.

The Hon. R. J. EDDY (Doutta Galla Province): Can the Minister of Health tell me, with respect to the Syme-Townsend report, whether an implementation committee has been formed? If so, is it intended to make the reports of the committee public and does the committee intend to receive comments and suggestions from social workers, welfare officers, and people from para-medical groups?

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health): A health planning committee has been set up to

recommend to the Government the processes by which the recommenda· tions of the Syme-Townsend report will be put into effect. The members of the committee are Sir Colin Syme, Mr. T. Swanson, and Mr. G. Rogan. The purpose of the committee is to advise the Government, and the reports of the committee, such as they may be, will not be for public use. The opportunity to make submissions to that planning committee would not be appropriate because submissions have already been made to the Syme-Townsend committee on all the needs involved. The purpose of the planning committee is merely to advise the Government on what steps ought to be taken to implement the plan.

DRAINAGE OF LAND LEGISLA nON.

The Hon. S. R. McDONALD (Northern Province): I refer the Minister of Water Supply to the drainage of land legislation that was passed last year and ask whether the chairman and members of the Drainage Tribunal have been appointed. Furthermore, when will the legislation become operative, and does the Minister intend to introduce legislation setting up regional drainage authorities?

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER (Minister of Water Supply): The Chairman of the Drainage Tribunal has not yet been selected. Initially, as honorable members will recall, when the Bill was before Parliament it was envisaged that a judge of the County Court would be chairman of this tribunal. However, after making representations to my colleague, the Attorney-General, I have been informed that there is no judge of the County Court available for the tribunal and the Attorney-General has recommended to me three barristers who he considers have had the necessary experience in this field to be considered as chairman. I envisage that this appointment, together with the appointments of the lay members of the tribunal, will be made


very shortly. There have ~een 31 applications for these appomtments and some very good men have offered themselves.

I hope the Act will be promulgated shortly but r cannot state the date.

In reference to Mr. McDonald's further question whether I intend to introduce legislation setting up a regional drainage authority, this is something that will happen in the future. No legislation is currently being drafted. However, it is in my mind and in the Premier's mind, I believe, that this should be considered perhaps after we see how the present drainage legislation works.

ALBURY-WODONGA DEVELOPMENT.

The Hon. I. B. TRAYLING (Melbourne Province): Further to the question asked by my colleague, Mr. Elliot, about the AlburyWodonga development project, I ask the Minister for State Development and Decentralization whether he is aware of the significant contribution to increasing unemployment that the lack of a definitive statement on the future of the area has caused through the difficulty that the corporation has in either letting new contracts or providing for the continuity of existing contracts for works in the area. Furthermore, in the event of the failure of the Commonwealth Government to give some sort of an assurance for the future of the area, does the Minister propose any action to ensure that such unemployment as has been created by the lack of a definitive statement is mitigated?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister for State Development and Decentralization): The answer to Mr. Trayling's first question is. "Yes". The answer to the second question is that it will be the objective of the Victorian Government to provide the best possible alternative plan in the event that funding of the project is substantially reduced. Naturally, we are cognizant of the effect that any

severe reduction in loan funding for this project would have on the immediate situation.

SWEARING IN OF NEW MEMBERS.

The Hon. O. G. JENKINS (South Western Province): I direct a question to the Leader of the House. Have firm arrangements yet been made to swear in members who were elected on 20th March?

The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary): Yes. There will be a special, one-day sitting of the Legislative Council on Tuesday, 29th June, at 2.30 p.m. when the swearing in of new members will take place, as well as the election of the successor to you, Mr. President, and the Chairman of Committees, and the setting up of the various committees. Members will be advised in writing.

PAPERS.

The following papers, pursuant to the directions of several Acts of Parliament, were laid on the table by the Clerk-Melbourne University-Financial statements

for the year 1974. Statutory Rules under the Public Service

Act 1974-No. 99; and P.S.D. Nos. 57 and 58.

Town and Country Planning Act 1OO1-Shire of South Gippsland Planning SchemeAmendment No. 20, 1975.


The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary): I move-

That this Bill be now read a second time. The Bill is to provide the appropriation necessary to meet requirements for departmental expenditure from the Consolidated Fund in the period from 1st July next until the annual Appropriation Act is passed after the introduction of the Budget for 1976-77 in the spring sessional period of Parliament.

The total provision of $854·046 million represents the estimate of the amount which could be required fer the continuation of existing ~ervices pending th~ passing of the annual Appropriation Act. No provision ha~

688 Supply (1976-77, [COUNCIL.] No. 1) Bill.

been made for any new policy proposals which may come forward in the Budget. This, of course, is in accordance with well established and accepted practice.

The arrangement of divisions in the table to the Bill follows the 1975-76 Appropriation Act, with the addition of a new division-No. 739-to provide for the Ministry of Water Resources and Water Supply which has been established during the current financial year.

This Bill is an appropriation for the financial year 1976-77, a year which will mark a dramatic and far reaching change in the financial relationships not only between this State and the Commonwealth, but between all States and the Commonwealth.

It will be the first year of the " new federalism", the first real attempt since Federation to arrive at a sensible and firm basis for apportioning income tax revenues between Federal, State and local government through a tax-sharing arrangement which will obviate the annual trek by the States to Canberra each June to discuss and argue about the level of tax reimbursement grants by the Commonwealth for the new financial year. There is also now the prospect of a rationalizing of responsibilities between the three tiers of government in Australia which will make for much better administration.

Because of this, it is appropriate that the House should be informed on the nature and significance of the new arrangements which will operate in the financial year 1976-77, to which this Bill relates, and in subsequent years.

Income tax was effectively appropriated in 1942, as a war-time measure, by the Federal Government which has never since conceded to the States any power to raise their own income tax. Since then, the States have been receiving handouts from the Commonwealth under what were originally referred to euphemistically as "tax reimbursement grants", but now as " financial assistance grants".

The Hon. V. O. Dickie.

As from 1st July, 1976, the beginning of the financial year to which this Bill relates, this will all be changed. From then a m~w system of income tax-sharing will operate. After preliminary discussions in February, on 9th April the Prime Minister and the Premiers of all States reached agreement on a system of sharing personal income tax between the Commonwealth and the States. The agreement was unanimous. It will be implem'ented in two stages. It will include provision not only for sharing by the States in personal income tax-a matter which is within the constitutional power of the States as well as the Commonwealth-but it will also include provision for local government to have a share of income tax collections by the Commonwealth.

Under stage 1 of the scheme, to operate in 1976-77, the States will be entitled in each financial year to a percentage of personal incom'e tax collections by the Commonwealth in that year. The percentage will be that percentage which the total of financial assistance grants in 1975-76 bears to personal income tax collections by the Commonwealth in 1975-76. On the basis of presentthough preliminary-estimates, that will be about 34·5 per cent.

The amount so derived will be distribut'ed each year between the States on the same basis as the financial assistance grants in 1975-76. The matter of per capita relativities between the States is to be reviewed after an initial period on the advice of an independent body yet to be determined-possibly the Commonwealth Grants Commission.

Two guarantees by the Commonwealth will operate in respect of the amount to be received by each State. The first is that the amount in any year will be not less in absolute terms than the amount in the previous year. The second is that for an initial period of four years the amount to be received by a State in a year will be not less than the amount


which the present formula for financial assistance grants would have given it.

Apart from these guarantees, it will be apparent that with the amount to be received by the State being tied to Commonwealth collections from personal income tax, a significant measure of the income to the State is dependent on what those collections are. To this end the Commonwealth has given firm assurances that-

(a) It would ensure that the States are kept fully informed of relevant tax changes made by the Commonwealth and of their estimated effects on the States' entitlements;

(b) it would participate in a review of the arrangements when there were changes in Commonwealth tax legislation which would have effects on the States' entitlements of such significance as to warrant such a review; and

(c) longer-term trends in regard to such matters as changes in the relative importance of personal income tax vis-a-vis other taxes would be kept under notice between the Commonwealth and State Governments.

It is obvious also that the degree of tax indexation adopted in the next Federal Budget will affect both total income tax collections, and consequently the share of all States.

Decisions about stage 2, including marginal income tax and the extent to which special purpose-tiedgrants may be absorbed into general purpose grants and incorporated into the share of each State of income tax collections will not be made until next year. In the meantime all special purpose grants will be reviewed.

The arrangements which I have outlined begin to apply from the beginning of 1976-77, the period covered by the Bill and referred to in it. They will affect the income to the Consolidated Fund out of which the appropriation is made by this Bill.

They embrace a prinCiple which this State has fought for consistently-not this Government alone, but this State and this Parliament, for all parties represented in the House have endorsed in formal terms, and by resolution, the fundamental premise that if the Parliament of this State, and the Parliaments of all States, are to continue as responsible instruments of government within the framework of the Federation of the Commonwealth of Australia, then to the utmost extent practicable they must be responsible for raiSing the moneys which they spend.

What has been demonstrated is that it is possible-and that it was always possible-to allow the Parliaments of the States to return to their rightful position in the government of this great Commonwealth with due regard to the intention of those who founded it, and with equal regard to the history of events which have succeeded its founding.

What is more, it has been demonstrated that this can and will be achieved while preserving to the citizen and to the taxpayer all the advantages of so called "uniform taxation It-one return, one assessment, one income tax collecting agency.

It is a "new deal" for the structure of government in Australia and it will surely make for better and more responsible government.

The new arrangements are equally important for local government. The intended sharing of revenue from income tax represents a " new deal" in every way for local government and for ratepayers. For the first time it offers them some prospect of relief from carrying the whole burden of municipal expenditures.

From 1st July next all local government bodies will have a guarantee of continuing participation in the revenue derived by the Commonwealth Government from personal income tax. This can be described only as a giant step forward in the recognition

690 Supply (1976-77, [COUNCIL.] No. 1) Bill.

of the importance of local government, and its place in a three tier system embracing Commonwealth, State, and local government.

This right for local government to have a defined share of the national pool of taxation, without strings or conditions, has been a long-standing objective of the Victorian Government.

As from 1st July, 1976, the Commonwealth Government will each year earmark a defined percentage of personal income tax collections of the previous year for distribution to the States for local government. The percentage will be announced by the Commonwealth Government in due course, as will be the basis of sharing between States, on which the Grants Commission has been asked to make recommendations.

It will then be the duty of each State to arrange for a fair and equitable allocation of the total fund among the local government authorities in each State.

This matter has been discussed with the Municipal Association, and our present intention is that the funds received by the State will be distributed to local government on a two-part basis. Part of the total figure, to be known as Element A, will be distributed between all local government bodies, on a weighted per capita basis. The balance, to be known as Element B, will be distributed on a cc needs " basis, having regard to factors such as-rate of growth of the municipality, geographical features, rateable capacity and rating effort, non-rateable areas, and use of facilities by non-resident population.

As indicated by His Excellency the Governor in his Speech at the opening of the Parliament, the Government proposes to introduce legislation to establish a State Grants Commission which will be responsible for making recommendations in respect of the allocation of funds becoming available under the new arrangements.

The Ron. V. O. Dickie.

A further element in the arrangements proposed by the Commonwealth is the possible absorption of specific purpose payments to local government into its general purpose grants in order to further increase its independence of action. This is a complex issue which will be the subject of detailed examination in consultation with the Municipal Association of Victoria. I commend the Bill to the House.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH (Doutta Galla Province): I move-

That the debate be now adjourned. On the understanding that the House will not meet next week, I suggest that the debate be adjourned for seven days. In effect, that will mean that the debate will not be resumed for fourteen days.

I ask the Leader of the House whether it will again be possible for me to have access to the budgeting officer to obtain information on many of these new procedures. I do not know what arrangements have been rnade between the Victorian and Federal Governments.

The Hon. V. o. DICKIE (Chief Secretary): That officer will be made available for consultation.

The motion for the adjournment of the debate was agreed to, and it was ordered that the debate be adjourned until Tuesday, May 18.

SECOND-HAND DEALERS (CHARITY COLLECTORS) BILL.

The debate (adjourned from May 5) on the motion of the Hon. V. O. Dickie (Chief Secretary) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

The Hon. R. J. EDDY (Doutta Galla Province): The Labor Party does not oppose this Bill, which is exactly the same as a measure introduced into the Legislative Council last September. That measure was agreed to by the Council. It went to the Legislative Assembly but it lapsed when Parliament was prorogued because of the Federal elections which took place in December.

Second-hand Dealers [11 lVIAY, 1976.] (Charity Collectors) Bill. 691

The Second-hand Dealers (Charity Collectors) Act became law in 1970 and was amended in 1972. It was later found that certain anomalies existed and they account for this Bill now being before the House. It is my firm belief that the Minister has made the necessary corrections and that there will be no need for amending Bills such as this to come before Parliament again. The anomalies which have existed are well covered by this measure.

Clause 3 provides that collectors for charitable organizations must be licensed to carry out collections. Previously, persons who stated that they were acting on behalf of certain charitable organizations were going around the community collecting goods but the charitable organizations did not always receive the benefit of the goods which had been collected. Besides collectors having to be licensed. sub-collectors will also have to be licensed, otherwise they will be liable to a fine. A person who does not hold a charity collector's licence and is collecting for or on behalf of a recognized charity shall be liable to a fine of $500, and a person not holding a licence as a charity sub-collector shall be liable to a fin'e of $250. This will correct some of the anomalies which have existed in the past.

Certain organizations such as the Scout Association of Australia, the Girl Guides Association of Australia and approved youth clubs or other approved organizations which have to work hard to raise financ'e with which to run their little shows will be exempted from the provisions of the Bill. This will mean that persons who help to raise finance for those organizations will not require a licenc'e.

In future persons who act as collectors for charitable organizations will be eligible to accept only 50 per cent of the net proceeds of the sale of the artides collected. The remainder of the proceeds will go to the charitable organization concerned. The charitable organiza-

tions which will be mainly affected are the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, the Brotherhood of St. Laurence and the Red Cross Society. Those organizations are well known to honorable members for the wonderful service they have performed for the people throughout Victoria. The Labor Party trusts that this Bill will correct the anomalies which have existed in the past and wishes the measure a speedy passage through the House.

The HOD. S. R. McDONALD (Northern Province): Members of the National Party support the Bill. As Mr. Eddy stated, it is similar to a Bill which was debated and passed during the last Parliament and for that reason there is no need for me to deal with the reasons why the National Party supports it.

However, I do not share Mr. Eddy's tremendous confidence that all the anomalies in the principal legislation will be removed. I remind the House that this is the third time it has gone through this process. In 1970 it enacted th'e Second-hand Dealers (Charity Collectors) Act, No. 8030, which was never proclaimed. In 1972 the Second-hand Dealers (Charitable Collectors) Act, No. 8351, was passed but never proclaimed. I hope we have better luck this time.

As I have stated, the National Party supports the amendments and hopes the Bill is more productive and successful than the two measures passed 'On previous occasions.


The Bill was read a second time, and passed through its remaining stages.

BUSINESS FRANCHISE (TOBACCO) BILL

This Bill was received from the Assembly and, on the motion of the Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary) , was read a first time.

692 Dandenong Valley Authority [COUNCIL.] (Amendment) Bill.

COMMONWEALTH AND STATES FINANCIAL AGREEMENT BILL.

This Bill was received from the Assembly and, on the motion of the Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary), was read a first time.

DANDENONG VALLEY AUTHORITY (AMENDMENT) BILL.

The debate (adjourned from May 5) on the motion of the Hon. F. J. Granter (Minister of Water Supply) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

The Hon. J. M. WALTON (Melbourne North Province): This Bill proposes to make four amendments to the Dandenong Valley Authority Act. The Labor Party is in concurrence with the proposed amendments. The first amendment transfers to the control of the Dandenong Valley Authority a small section of the Mordialloc Creek that is currently under the control of the Mordialloc City Council. From inquiries I have made, I understand that because of the work that has been done by the authority in the higher reaches of the creek, the section of the creek under discussion is becoming a worth-while proposition as a waterway. Most honorable members who travel over the lower reaches of the Mordialloc Creek would believe it to be disgusting, to say the least. When the Dandenong Valley Authority assumes control of this section of the creek, I am hopeful it will be able to carry out good work on it just as it has on the higher reaches.

The other amendments provide for the authority to have easements set aside on plans of subdivision of land within its district; to increase its fees on certificates issued from $1 to $2 and, finally, to give permission for the authority to grant easements over any lands to which it holds title.

In effect it is a simple Bill but, because it relates to the control of Mordialloc Creek, it is most important.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN (NorthWestern Province): The National Party is not opposed to the Bill which has been introduced by the Minister of Water Supply. The major purpose, which has been explained by Mr. WaIton, is to hand over a further section of Mordialloc Creek to the control of the Dandenong Valley Authority.

Already, that authority controls the upper section of the creek and it is felt that one authority could more adequately control the probl'ems in the creek, especially the flooding problems and matters relating to the quality of the water.

The National Party trusts that the authority will be able to achieve the required result and make the necessary improvements. As I indicated, the National Party is happy with the Bill and offers no objection to its four amending provisions.


The Bill was read a second time and committed.

Clause 1 was agreed to.

Clause 2 (Portion of Mordialloc Creek declared to be within the district) .

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER (Minister of Water Supply): I thank Mr. WaIton and Mr. Dunn for their indication of support on behalf of their parties. I have no doubt the Dandenong Valley Authority can carry out the work and that it will be to the credit of the authority and the area when the work is completed. The creek has been an eyesore for some time and it is most unfortunate that the section of the creek to which the Bill relates has been left in its present state. I am hopeful that once the authority carries out the restoration work and the cleaning out of the creek, the area adjacent to the creek will be beautified by the Mordialloc City Council. It has been indicated that this will be undertaken at a later date. I reiterate my thanks to the other parties for their support.

Business Franchise [11 MAY, 1976.] (Tobacco) Bill. 693

The clause was agreed to, as were the remaining clauses.


BUSINESS FRANCHISE (TOBACCO) BILL.


That this Bill be now read a second time.

I ts purpose is to remedy certain matters which have arisen in relation to the licensing of wholesale tobacco merchants under the provisions of the Business Franchise (Tobacco) Act 1974.

As the legislation stands it is possible for a wholesaler to avoid payment of a licence fee appropriate to the level of the turnover of his business. Basically this situation arises as a result of the present system of issuing wholesale tobacco merchants' licences with a currency of one year, the 1icence fee being related to the turnover of the business in a prior period of twelve months ending on 30th September preceding the year of licence.

I t has been brought to the notice of the Government that it is possible for a person or company to obtain an initial wholesale tobacco merchant's licence on the basis of conducting a limited business with a small turnover thereby attracting a minimal fee for the first annual licence. Over the course of the year the wholesaler then proceeds to conduct a business with a substantial turnover. The wholesaler may avoid payment of a licence fee appropriate to the turnover of his business by not renewing his licence the following year, either relinquishing his business altogether or transferring his business to an~ other person or company associated with him. Substantial revenue may be lost as a result of this operation, particularly if the business is transferred to a different associate at the close of every licence period.

Provision has been made in this Bill to remedy this situation, firstly by grouping associated wholesalers and secondly by reducing the currency of licences issued to tobacco wholesalers to a period of one month.

As a result of the introduction of grouping provisions special provision has been made for the issue of group wholesale tobacco merchants' licences. Tobacco wholesalers who by virtue of the grouping provisions comprise a group will be required to hold a group wholesaler's licence, a member of a group applying on behalf of the members of the group for a group licence. Appropriate provision is made to omit from a group a person who would, by virtue of the grouping provisions be a member of a group, where that person does not, or does not intend to carry on tobacco wholesaling, or, being a wholesaler, is in fact independent of the group and not subject to control by any other member of the group.

The Government proposes that the changes in relation to the issue of wholesale tobacco merchants' licences and group wholesale tobacco merchants' licences operate as soon as is practicable. Accordingly, as from 1st June next all wholesale tobacco merchants' licences, including group wholesale tobacco merchants' licences, will have a currency of one month. The monthly fee will be $10 plus an amount equivalent to 10 per cent of intrastate sales-other than sales to another licensed wholesaler or group of wholesalers-made by the wholesaler or the group during the month occurring two months prior to the month for which the licence is current.

The Bill also includes a change in the definition of the value of tobacco sold on which the licence fee is assessed. With the sanction of the Prices Justification Tribunal, wholesale tobacco merchants have increased the wholesale price of tobacco products by 10 per cent to take

694 Commonwealth and States [COUNCIL.] Financial Agreement Bill.

account of the licence fee. This increase has become part of the wholesale price, and the effect of the change to monthly licences, together with the present definition of value on which the licence fee is assessed, would be to increase the licence fee automatically to an effective 11 per cent for the first month. To obviate this effect, provision is made in the Bill for the value of tobacco sold by a wholesaler to be 10/llths of the selling price. This will ensure that the effective licence fee remains at 10 per cent.

There is no departure from the principle underlying the issue of tobacco merchants' licences. The licences will apply for a prospective trading period and the fee will be calculated with reference to the turnover of the applicant for the licence in a prior trading period. I commend the Bill to the House.

On the motion of the Hon. J. M'. Walton, for the Hon. D. G. ELLIOT (Melbourne Province), the debate was adjourned.

It was ordered that the debate be adjourned until the next day of meeting.

COMMONWEALTH AND STATES FINANCIAL AGREEMENT BILL.


That this Bill be now read a second time. Its purpose is to approve the execution of an agreement entered into by the Commonwealth and the six States on 5th February, 1976, to amend the Financial Agreement. The amending agreement is attached as a schedule to the Bill.

The original Financial Agreement of 1927 was entered into by the Commonwealth and the six States under the power given under section 105A of the Constitution, which specifically provided for the Commonwealth to make agreements with the States with respect to the public debts of the States. The provisions of the agreement have been amended several times since 1927 by subse-

quent agreements, the last occasion being in 1966 when an amending agreement to permit the agreement to operate in decimal currency was ratified by this Parliament.

The amendments contained in the schedule to this Bill are principally concerned with the assumption of liability by the Commonwealth Government for $1,000 million of State debt, as envisaged under the States Grants (Debt Charges Assistance) Act 1970. They also streamline the operation of the sinking fund provisions of the agreement and provide for greater flexibility in Loan Council procedures. In addition they remove from the 1927 agreement certain redundant provisions. In addition to app,roving the execution of the amending agreement of 5th February last, provision has been made under clause 4 of the Bill to repeal two sections of the Commonwealth and States Financial Agreement Act 1927. Both these sections are now redundant.

I turn now to deal with each of the individual matters contained in the amending agreement. At the June 1970 Premiers Conference the Commonwealth agreed, as part of the increased revenue assistance provided to the States, to meet the debt charges on $200 million of existing State debt in 1970-71 and an additional $200 million in each of the subsequent four years until 1974-75 when the Commonwealth would take over full responsibility for the debt charges on $1,000 million of State debt. The distribution of the debt charges assistance so provided and the distribution of the debt to be taken over was in proportion to the total outstanding debt of each State under the Financial Agreement as at 30th June, 1970.

This assistance was provided by way of grants by the Commonwealth to each of the States, the grants being equivalent to the debt charges on the debt progressively taken over. The Commonwealth legislation which authorized the payment of these

Commonwealth and States [11 MAY, 1976.] Financial Agreement Bill. 69S

grants-the States Grants (Debt Charges Assistance) Act 1970-made no provision for the formal transfer of the debt, this requiring legislative approval by the Commonwealth and an State Parliaments.

It was then agreed by the Aus~ traIian Loan Council at its June 1974 meeting that transfer of liability to the Commonwealth should be effected by an amendment to the Financial Agreement. The appropriate amendment is contained in clause 9 of the amending agreement. The securities to be taken over are set out in a schedule to the amending agreement. They carry an average interest rate of 5·5 per cent compared with the average of 5· 1 per cent for all State Government securities on issue at 30th June, 1970. The amount of debt taken over in respect of this State amounts to $241·9 million.

The changes in the operation of the sinking fund provisions of the Finan~ cial Agreement are contained in clause 8 of the amending agreement. The need for these changes stems basically from problems inherent in the operation of the original sinking fund arrangements. The sinking fund provisions of the 1927 agreement were designed to redeem the net debt of the States at 30th June, 1927, over a period of 58 years and new loans raised for the States after that date over a period of 53 years.

In respect of the debt at 30th June, 1927, the agreement provided for each State and the Commonwealth to pay an annual contribution of 0·25 per cent and O· 125 per cent respectively. In respect of new loans raised after that date the Commonwealth and the States each paid an annual contribution of 0·25 per cent. Higher contributions were payable by a State in respect of loans raised to redeem a deficit incurred after 1927 and in other circumstances. In addition to the annual contributions so payable the States were required to pay a contribution of 4·5 per cent on debt redeemed from prior contributions for the period over which the annual contribution was to be paid.

The theoretical basis of these contributions is that an annuity payment at the rate of 4·5 per cent based on the relevant contributions is sufficient to redeem the loan over the period during which the annual contribution is payable.

For various reasons the 4·5 per cent factor in the annuity payment has never operated as was envisaged when the original agreement was signed. For example, the ·devaluation of the Australian pound by 25 per cent in 1931 had the effect of re· ducing the amount of London securi· ties redeemed from sinking fund contributions to 80 per cent of that which was previously redeemable from. an equivalent amount of AustralIan currency. Furthermore, because the contributions were based on each loan raised on behalf of the States since 1927, voluminous and complex calculations were involved in deter· mining the contributions payable each year.

The new sinking fund provisions tn the amending agreement provide for a contribution by the States and Commonwealth of a base amount in respect of 1975-76. For the following nine years to 1984-85-ten in the case of New South Wales-the contribution payable is the base amount adjusted by a flat rate percentage of 1 ·2 per cent by the States and ·28 per cent by the Commonwealth on the net increase or decrease in State debt over the net debt outstanding at 30th June, 1975. Thereafter the State pay a contribution at a flat rate of ·85 per cent and the Commonwealth pays a contribution at a flat rate of ·28 per cent on the net public debt of each State at the close of the previous year. This method avoids the complexities which arose in the past as a result of linking sinking fund payments to the securities issued in each loan raised on behalf of the States. In addition the varying rates of contributions previously payable in respect of deficit loans and other matters have been abolished. Moreover the new rates of contribution have been calculated to provide

696 Commonwealth and States [COUNCIL.] Financial Agreement Bill.

sinking fund contributions comparable to the projected amount payable under the previous arrangements. The lower contributions after the first ten years to 1984-85 reflect the cessation of contributions under the previous arrangements in respect of the June, 1927, debt of the States.

The new method has the same financial impact on State Budgets as the outworking of the old method. Accounting procedures under the new arrangements have been simplified with all costs, such as brokerage and commission, associated with the repurchase or redemption of State debt being a charge on the sinking fund. The new arrangements will provide for effective and relatively simple calculated payments for the retirement of the debt of the States.

The opportunity has been taken to amend the agreement to expedite proceedings of the Australian Loan Council. These amendments are included in clause 7 of the amending agreement. They provide that the nomination by a member of the Loan Council of a substitute Minister as his representative will now include any person acting in that capacity for the time being and that decisions by the Loan Council on the amount and allocation of Government loan programmes can now be made by correspondence without the need to hold a formal meeting to endorse the decision.

Clause 10 of the amending agreement provides for the omission of five redundant clauses of the original agreement and for the reinstatement in decimal currency of the statutory payment by the Commonwealth to the States towards interest payable by the States on State debt.

As the agreement is not operative until legislation to approve its execution is enacted by all seven Parliaments, special provision is made for its retrospective operation as from 30th June, 1975. I commend the Bill to the House.

The Hon. V. O. Dickie.

On the motion of the Hon. R. J. Eddy, for the Hon. J. W. GALBALLY (Melbourne N orth Province) , the debate was adjourned.

It was ordered that the debate be adjourned until Tuesday, May 25.

TATTERSALL CONSULTATIONS (SOCCER FOOTBALL POOLS) BILL.

This Bill was received from the Assembly and, on thte motion of the Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary), was read a first time.



On 13th April I introduced the Tattersall Consultations (Soccer Football Pools) Bill and explained its purpose. This was to amend the Tattersall Consultations Act 1958 to enable Governments in other States to receive direct from the promoter amounts equivalent to the duty referrable to subscriptions in their States to soccer football pools conducted in Victoria under the Tattersall Consultations Act. At that time arrangements were already in force in respect to New South Wales and Tasmania, and a transitional provision was included in the Bill to formally authorize and validate those arrangements.

This week I received advice from the Queensland Treasurer that legislation has been passed in Queensland to authorize soccer pools to operate in Queensland. It is necessary, there~ fore, that the transitional provision be widened and that it be capable of application in respect of any State which may desire to become a reciprocating State as defined in the Bill at any time.

Apart from this, it has been discovered that the form of the earlier Bill did not adequately and precisely achieve its primary purpose. In these circumstances, rather than put to the House a series of amendments which could lead to confusion, the best

Bees (Amendment) [11 MAY, 1976.] Bill. 697

course is to withdraw the Bill already before the Hous1e and to introduce a new measure. I will be moving the appropriate motion to withdraw the original Bill shortly.

As indicated, interim arrangements have already been made with New South Wales and Tasmania whereby the Governments of those States receive the duty in respect of subscriptions to socc1er pools in those States which become part of the total pool conducted under the licence held by Tattersall's in Victoria. Queensland is about to participate. Other States may wish to follow.

This Bill therefore provides the legislative basis under which the Government of Victoria will be able to enter into a formal agreement with any other State at any time to enable the promoter to pay direct to that State the duty referrable to subscriptions in that State to soccer football pools conducted in Victoria under the Tattersall Consultations Act.

In the event that, as a matter of timing, soccer pools operate in another State in advance of the formal agreement being completed, the transitional provision in sub-clause (5) of clause 2 will authorize the payment of the relevant duty to that State out of the Consolidated Fund. This is a necessary machinery arrangement which needs to be available for use at any time in respect of any State, and not merely in relation to the States of New South WaJ1es and Tasmania in this finan,cial year. I commend the Bill to the House.

On the motion of the Hon. R. J. EDDY (Doutta Galla Province), the debate was adjourned.


BEES (AMENDMENT) BILL.

The debate (adjourned from April 27) on the motion of the Hon. W. V. Houghton (Minister of Health) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

The Hon. H. A. THOMAS (Melbourne West Province): This Bill will amend the Bees Act 1971, which provides for the registration of beekeepers. At present the prescribed fee is four cents a hive, with a maximum of $1, and it is proposed to increase the fee to six cents a hive, with a maximum of $1 .50 for a number of hives. It also provides that if hives are affected by disease they can be destroyed by an inspector, provided that the owner does not do so within the prescribed period. The present compensation value of such hives is $40, without the approval of the Minister, and it is proposed to increase that value to $200 a hive. The Bill also gives inspectors control over further apiary products, such as pollen, royal jelly and beeswax.

The Victorian branch of the Apiarists Association has no objection to the Bill and the Labor Party does not oppose it.

The HOD. A. K. BRADBURY (North-Eastern Province): Although one might say that this is not a large Bill, from the point of view of apiarists and beekeepers it could be said to have a mighty sting. I am rather surprised at the attitude of Mr. Thomas and the Labor Party in saying that the Apiarists Association of Victoria is not opposed to the Bill. I am also amazed that the Government introduced the Bill without first consulting the association, particularly as a number of members on the other side of the Chamber represent country areas-we were told recently that there are more members on the Government side representing country electorates than the total number of members on this side of the House. Nonetheless, they must not have received the sting, because the Apiarists Association is violently opposed to this Bill, as the Department of Agriculture knows very well.

According to the Minister's second-reading speech, the Bill did not emanate from a decision of the Minister of Agriculture or his own department; it simply followed a Treasury direction. In his speech,

698 Bees (Amendment) [COUNCIL] Bill.

the Minister said that following a decision of the Treasury to review fees and charges an amendment was required to the Act.

Honorable members heard in this House last week a debate on the plight of the primary producer and one reads about it every day, but despite the crocodile tears shed by the Government about what it is doing and attempting to do to alleviate the problems of the primary producer, this Bill has been brought in by the Minister of Agriculture without prior consultation with the Apiarists Association. I reiterate that this action was taken against the protestations of the association, which were conveyed to the Department of Agriculture by letter dated 23rd August, 1975. The letter, which resulted from a similar Bill being introduced into Parliament last year, is from Mr. Peter Green, the secretary of the Victorian Apiarists Association. The letter reads-

Enclosed for your Information and consideration, is a copy of a letter forwarded to the Senior Apiary Inspector, Mr. J. Rufford-Sharpe.

The letter is in reference to a proposal in hand to amend the Bees Act 1971, aimed at increasing bee hive registration fees.

We respectfully request that you consider this enclosure and give it your attention at the earliest possible time.

Unfortunately Mr. Rufford-Sharpe, who was the senior apiary inspector at the time, has since passed away. Notwithstanding what Mr. Thomas said in support of the Bill, the letter goes on and points out to the department the strong opposition by the association to the proposal.

The Hon. D. E. KENT: There was a lot of sting in it, was there?

The Hon. A. K. BRADBURY: I agree with Mr. Kent that there was a lot of sting in it, because along with many other primary producers beekeepers are having a tough time, and it may be tougher in the near future, because they are also suffering from inflation in their costs of production.

The Hon. D. E. KENT: They are not shooting their stock.

The Hon. A. K. BRADBURY: No, they are not shooting stock, but the bees are stinging a lot of people.

As I said, they are suffering from inflation and their returns are not coping with the inflated costs, but the Government is so little concerned about primary industry that it is forcing this increase in costs upon the beekeepers of Victoria. I do not believe there is any justification for the proposed increase.

My party tried to meet the Minister of Agriculture to negotiate with him a reasonable approach to the subject, but the Minister was too busy to find time even to discuss it with us. I phoned the Minister on the question.

The Hon. O. G. JENKINS: You could have paid for nine extra hives with the cost of the telephone call.

The Hon. A. K. BRADBURY: The phone call did not cost me anything, nor would it cost Mr. Jenkins anything if he made the call from within the House.

I pointed out to the Minister that the Apiarists Association was opposed to this Bill and suggested that if he wished to get more funds for general revenue, my party was prepared to meet him half way. We were prepared to have an increase to 5 cents a hive and would agree to a further amendment to the principal Act so that three cents should go to general revenue and 2 cents to the Bees Compensation Fu~d. However, the Minister said that his Government intended to proceed with the Bill as drafted.

The Hon. O. G. JENKINS: There is sense in that.

The Hon. A. K. BRADBURY: I am glad to hear Mr. Jenkins say that there is some sense in that. There is also some sense in having sufficient numbers in this House to enable a Government to steam roll a measure through against the will and wishes of the people who are affected by its provisions. Of course, it is evident that Mr. Jenkins knows no more than the Minister about this Bill.


I believe my party made a reasonable offer by being prepared to increase from two cents to three cents the amount that goes into general revenue at the present time. General revenue would not have been affected by our proposal, but the amount going into the compensation fund would have been affected. Some people may claim that there is a need to increase the compensation fund, but from the figures I received in answer to a question I asked on 20th November, 1975, it is evident there is no justification for an increase.

I remind the House that the compensation fund was introduced in 1971 and it was stated in the secondreading debate and agreed between the Apiarists Association and the Minister of the day, the late Sir Gilbert Chandler, that the compensation fund should not build up to more than $3,000, and over and above that, if necessary, it should be siphoned off for research purposes under the direction of the Agricultural Research Unit Advisory Committee.

The answer I received to the question was that the distribution in 1971-72 for general revenue was $2,213.82, and for the compensation fund $832.86. I remind honorable members that that was because the compensation fund operated only for part of that year. In 1972-73 the revenue for both funds was $3,425.07; in 1973-74, it was $2,546.73; and in 1974-75 the amount for both funds was $3,188.86. The answer to the question on what was the surplus in the fund at that stage was that the amount in the Bees Compensation Fund as at 7th November, 1975, was $8,200.23. The Minister said that several claims were pending, but during the three and a half years that the compensation fund has been in existence only nineteen claims have been made, and only 155 hives have been condemned and destroyed. The total compensation paid out of the fund in that period of three and a half years was $1,793.22. There have been some

recent outbreaks of American foul brood in hives in the State, but I am reliably informed that no more than 90 hives have been affected. Nevertheless, there is a surplus of $8,200 in the compensation fund which is more than adequate to cover any claims which may be made on it.

This is a real snub to the Apiarists Association because the beekeepers themselves contribute 100 per cent to the compensation fund. Section 9 (1) of the Bill states-

Fifty per centum of the amount of registration fees paid under section 5 shall be paid into a trust account to be called the Bees Compensation Fund to be established and kept in the Treasury in the Public Account as part of the trust fund.

Therefore, 2 cents out of the former registration fee of 4 cents went to general revenue and 2 cents into the compensation fund. The beekeepers were contributing 100 per cent of the fund. No subsidy was received from the Government. The principal Act provides that if the fund is not sufficient to meet a claim, the Consolidated Fund can temporarily meet the amount but it is to be repaid from this fund. It is fortunate that there have been no claims anywhere near the amount in hand.

Since the compensation fund has been established, the beekeepers have become more vigilant in watching their hives. Previously if American foul brood was discovered in any of the hives, a beekeeper stood to lose the entire value of his hive. Now that the beekeepers are compensated for the loss, they have become more vigilant and not so hesitant in reporting an outbreak of American foul brood. Despite this, a further impost is being placed on beekeepers at a time when they can least afford it.

My colleagues and I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate an agreement with the Minister, but the Government has the numbers and is prepared to steamroll the Bill through. Members of the National Party are

700 Bees (Amendment) [COUNCIL.] Bill.

most disappointed that the Government, which is supposed to be looking after all sections of the community, is taking this action, particularly as many honorable members represent country areas. However, there has been no opposition from the country members on the Government side of the House despite the unanimous decision of the Victorian Apiarists Association. Last Friday week I opened the northeastern conference of the association at which more than 70 members were present. If Mr. Ward had been there he may have got stung, which is what the honorable member deserves because he claims to be a country member. He may also have received some education on the present-day problems of beekeepers and he may not have been so silent tonight.

Members of the National Party are the only members who truly look after the interests of country people, and particularly primary industries. vVe oppose this Bill because there can be no justification in increased charges of 100 per cent which are provided by the beekeepers themselves. Surely, as a matter of courtesy and principle the Government could have consulted the beekeepers before introducing amending legislation of this type. However, such courtesy does not exist in this Parliament because the proposal is to increase registration fees of which 50 per cent is for general revenue and 50 per cent for the compensation fund which is fully subscribed by the apiarists. The Government does not want to consult them. It considers that beekeepers are nobodys, just bushwackers from far places who are not worth consulting. The Government has the numbers and this is what it is doing.

I informed the Minister that we would agree to an amendment to section 9 of the principal Act to give 75 per cent to the general fund and 25 per cent to the

The Hon. A. K. Bradbury.

compensation fund. This would achieve the Government's aim but the amount of compensation would not be increased. The compensation fund is buoyant, and when the legislation was introduced it was never intended that the amount should go beyond $3,000. The fund now stands at $8,000, for which there can be no justification. The National Party strongly opposes the Bill.


The Hon. K. I. WRIGHT (NorthWestern Province) : I should like to say a few words on the subject of bees, and to support my colleague, Mr. Bradbury, and congratulate him for the forceful and accurate remarks he made on the Bill.

Victoria is the second largest honey-producing State in Australia. Of this production 90 per cent is from certain varieties of eucalypts. The other 10 per cent of honey production comes from clovers, lucerne and, strangely enough, even from Paterson's curse. Many of the eucalyptus trees that are utilized for honey production are yellow box, found in north-central Victoria, and ironbark.

In 1972-73 there were 1,342 registered apiarists who owned five or more beehives, and their average annual production was 3· 1 million kilograms. I have had a number of discussions with honey producers in the north-western part of Victoria and on a number of occasions I have made inspections of their hives and their activities in gathering the honey. The honey industry is a big one but today it is mobile, because the land that the hives are placed on is leased or permission is obtained from the farmer or the land owner to use the land. The honey is gathered from the site and taken back to the home, the factory or extraction building of the operator.

The president of the apiarists association in Mildura, Mr. Keith Emmins, is associated with honey in


a very big way, and is knowledgeable on the subject of pollination, which is an important factor in honey production. There are some fruit and seed crops that require pollination for the success of the operation. Many, of course, do not require pollination but nevertheless they serve a useful purpose in providing pollen for the bees. The hives can be hired out to those particular orchardists. Honey is highly regarded as a health food. Mr. Clarke reminds me that the bees themselves serve a useful purpose as a cure for rheumatism.

Up to 60 per cent of Victoria's production of honey is exported and honorable members are aware of the yalue of our export industry. The Stat~ has an interest in honey productIOn. The Government comes into the picture with disease control measures, research and in an advisory capacity. In 1973, 3,769 tonnes of honey was produced at a value of $2 million. I rather suspect that that figure is not completely accurate and that considerably more honey is produced.

One of the biggest honey-producing areas of the North-Western Province is the Kulkyne Forest where a number of good stands of red gum and black box are found. In the ·Mallee area honey is produced in the Big Desert and at Hattah. There is also a ~ourishing light honey industry that IS produced from citrus trees. Unfortunately it has proved rather difficult to keep the bees within the vicinity of the citrus trees and prevent them from straying to the eucalypts.

The big market for the honey produced from citrus is in Japan. At one stage before my obligations became greater I was the Chairman of the Develop Mildura Council and that was a particular project that mem~ers of the council pursued. There IS great concern amongst the honey producers about some types of insecticides that are used. If due care is not taken there can be a loss of bees from that cause and, conse-

quently, the producers are apt to leave an area where insecticides are used.

My constituents in the NorthWestern Province raise two main objections to the Bill. One of them has already been made very forcefully by my colleague, Mr. Bradbury. My constituents assure me that the Bees Compensation Fund is completely adequate with the $8,000 that it is in credit at present. They consider that no need exists for a 50 per cent increase in fees. I know some charges have been increased by 3,000 per cent in recent years and perhaps the Government considers, as a matter of principle, that every fund of this nature needs to be increased.

The main producers in the area have from 800 to 2,000 hives. This means that each producer would be paying fees of $100. With the escalating costs today that is a significant sum and it is not necessarily accompanied by any advantage. As Mr. Bradbury so correctly stated, there is no need for the increase.

I should like to mention a completely fresh aspect that has come into this matter and that is the action of the Land Conservation Council in Victoria. The council has recently announced recommendations for the Mallee study area. Although objection can be raised interested parties have until 1st July to appeal against them. I am greatly concerned that these recommendations will be detrimental to honey production in Hattah and Kulkyne, and the Big Desert in particular. I have had discussions with Mr. Dimmick, the Chairman of the Land Conservation Council, who is a capable man and generous with his time. He is prepared to discuss these matters with the people concerned. He stated that honey production will be permitted and that buffer areas have been allowed around these areas. Nevertheless it is my judgment and that of the producers that the conditions of the leasing of the sites to the producers will be governed by the management authorities; in other words,


the National Parks Service or perhaps the Fisheries and Wildlife Division. They may not be as generous in their outlook as Mr. Dimmick. To sum up, members of the National Party believe the legislation is most unnecessary and, furthermore, and most importantly, the apiarists do not want it.

The Hon. S. E. GLEESON (SouthWestern Province): I have a considerable interest in bees, quite fortuitously. I eat honey and I have a large number of hives where I live, t'O which I pay very little attention. Therefore, I should like to support the Bill and yet not say anything against what Mr. Bradbury and Mr. Wright have said.

The Hon. S. R. McD'ONALD: It is a bit each way.

The Hon. S. E. GLEESON: I suppose it is. The Bill is justified if it shows that the Department of Agriculture or some other body is taking an active interest in what types of bees are in the country, how they are looked after and how they are bred. I should hate to see a disaster such as that which befell South America and which might befall the whole of the American continent through the introduction of 'Other species of bees. This can be done by importation of the queen bee. A short rundown of what happened in South America might be of interest. Someone in Brazil did some interesting work on the African bee. The African bee is similar to the standard bee around the world, but there are variations such as the Cyprian bees which are more aggressive than the European ones.

If honorable members read The Cyprian Bees, by R. M. Wilson, writing under the pseudonym of Anthony Wynne, they will see that it shows how a person who disliked someone else brought about his death by bringing him near a swarm of bees. This man in Brazil was carrying out genetic experiments on bees. He had a number of hives at his research place with devices on the hives so that the

queen bees could not get out. Someone who was not properly informed removed these devices and some 20 or 30 queen bees escaped, resulting in a hybrid being developed in the area. This hybrid unfortunately has this aggressive make-up akin to that of the African bee. It is no more virulent but it is aggressive. Combined with that it has a peculiar physiological make-up of reacting violently to pheromones which are released by bees under certain circumstances. If someone kills a bee, it releases this pheromone and immediately attracts the other bees to attack the area in which the bee has been killed. This has resulted in quite a surprising number of deaths in the Brazilian area.

In one province alone twelve to fifteen deaths have occurred and these bees are spreading rapidly. As I say, they are no different from other bees except they are more aggressive. If a person kills or attacks a bee anywhere near the beehive, the whole lot will come out and have a go at that person. This has severe disadvantages if the person is allergic to bees. Having been stung a number of times, I am slightly allergic to bees. Depending on how allergic a person is, only a few stings may be necessary to cause a fatality. In fact, in ordinary conditions it takes only between 100 to 150 stings to kill a grown man.

As I was saying, it would be tragic if anyone tried to experiment with the breeding of bees. They are good honey gatherers, this Brazilian type, as they work very hard and they certainly fill the hive, but they are hard to rob. The Government should watch closely whether any experiments are carried out because we do not want what has taken place overseas to occur in Australia. If we are not careful experimentation could result in this type of thing occurring, which could create a public hazard.

The Hon. A. K. BRADBURY : It would be reasonably easy to import that breed of bee.


The Hon. S. E. GLEESON: That is why I am glad someone is going to watch this. An interesting thing to consider is that with the prevalent use of insecticides and pesticides great harm is done to bees in some areas with resultant damage to horticulture and agriculture and it must be remembered that the bee is an essential part of the reproductive process for plants. The consequence of aggressive hybrid bees becoming prevalent might be that action to protect humans against these insects might have harmful results on agriculture and horticulture. I have solved my own problem with the hives by using pest strips which do not contaminate the surrounding area and do not result in further damage. I place a small portion in the entry to the area where the hive is and the hive will eventually leave. The pest strip does not kill many bees and I believe that method is the best. For that reason and because of the danger to the habitat, I support the Bill to make sure someone will keep an eye on the bee industry and hives.

The HOD. D. G. ELLIOT (Melbourne Province): Honorable members become accustomed to magnificent speeches by Mr. Gleeson and quite frequently he favours us with a comment which is well worth listening to. I do not know whether you, Mr. President, have had any personal experience with bees, but you cannot help but wax sentimental at times. In recent years I have become friendly with an apiarist whose name is Alf in northern New South Wales. He and his wife Marie look after their hives together and have two sets on our property. A lot of people know Alf and Marie and have come to love ~hem over the years. I find apiarists In general are very wonderful people.

When one talks to apiarists about bees one discovers that the hive is a. living social community, that the SIze of the cell determines whether a bee is a queen bee, a drone or a worker, and that the hive carries on as an entity 'and produces for us that

wonderful substance called honey. I, too, hope the Government will watch this legislation carefully.

<?bviously Mr. Bradbury and Mr. Wnght ~ave been well briefed, apart from theIr own extensive knowledge, by the apiarists. As I said, they are very fine people and they are entitled to the ultimate in protection because we do not want to happen to them what has occurred in South America. Whatever revenue is raised by this measure should be ploughed back into the industry. I hope the Government will be very gentle over the introduction of this measure and that it will ensure that there is not an occurrence in this country like the one Mr. Gleeson explained. There is nothing better in the morning than to have a cup of black coffee or tea and a nice roll with honey-a beautiful combination.




Clause 2 (Amendment of No. 8216 s.5).

The HOD. A. K. BRADBURY (North-Eastern Province) : I am extremely disappointed. Although Mr. Gleeson indicated his support of the Bill-I would suggest he had two bob each way-the Minister of Health has not responded on behalf of the Government. In fact, apart from Mr. Gleeson no Government supporter has spoken on this Bill.

The Hon. R. J. EDDY: They may not know anything about bees.

Th~ Hon. A. K. BRADBURY: They certamly have not received a sting from the bees. Government supporters claim to represent the primary producers and during the last State election campaign members of the Liberal Party went to the people with the slogan " Hamer makes it Happen" but I suggest all he is making happen is increasing the burden upon the primary producer in this State and by this measure, on the apiarists. '


There is no justification for this increase which will be paid into the compensation fund. There has not been one word of explanation to justify the increase. The principal Act provides that if the fund exceeds a certain amount-$3,000-portion of it can be syphoned off into a research programme on the recommendation of the research committee of the Apiarists Association 'Of Victoria. There has been no 'recommendation from the research committee for further research to be carried out. That being the case I want toO know how the Government can justify an increase which is expected to raise an additional $2,188 which will be reefed off the apiarists and paid into the compensation fund each year.

There is an absolute lack of understanding by a Government which, during the election campaign, went to the people of Victoria, especially in country areas, and asserted that they must have a representative within the ranks of the Government to make known their view. Tonight there has been complete silence from members of the Government. This bears out the lack of understanding and the hazy views of country members within the Liberal Party. Instead of representing the people who elected them they are just seat warmers.

As I mentioned earlier, at the conference held in Wangaratta recently the apiarists were amazed that this Bill had been introduced last year but not proceeded with in either House. Their only interpretation of that was that the Government was using it as a piece of political propaganda.

The CHAIRMAN (the Hon. G. J. Nicol): Order! I hesitate to interrupt the honorable member, but I believe his remarks are hardly appropriate on clause 2. They would be more appropriate for a second-reading speech.

The Hon. A. K. BRAD BURY : Mr. Chairman, I am entitled to speak on clause 2 in opposition to the increase in the registration fee which is proposed under this Bill. I again state

that 50 per cent of the registration fees proposed in clause 2 are to go into the compensation fund. With due deference, Mr. Chairman, I am not going outside that ambit but I am pointing out the lack of concern by members of the Liberal Party, as has been demonstrated here in the House tonight, for the welfare of the primary producers of the State.

There is no justification whatever for the proposed increase and honorable members can only accept the Minister's silence as illustrating that either he does not understand the Bill or he cannot advance one argument in support 'Of the increase. The National Party will vote against the clause.

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health) : As the Leader of the Opposition interjects, I have been stung not only to reply but also into responding. It is a pity because Mr. Bradbury well understands the purpose of the Bill. It is not true to say that the apiarists do not want this measure. One of the big areas for the production of honey, in spite of the predominance of the North-Eastern Province, which we raIl clearly understand predominates in almost everything, is around Bendigo. The Minister of Forests, who represents that area, also has a fair bit to do with the raw material for the bees. He has informed me that he has not received one word of objection from any of the apiarists in his province, and there are very many of them. Nor has he received objection in connection with his responsibility of handling forests. There has been absolutely no 'Objection to the raising of the registration fee on a hive from 4 cents to 6 cents.

What is the purpose of the registration? It is to ensure, as Mr. Gleeson explained so carefully and so well, the preservation of the industry from the sort of thing which could happen here. It has been introduced in the interests of the apiarists or the beekeepers and most of them recognize it. I wonder whet11er ,Mr. Bradbury w'Ould suggest that the veterinary research institute, which receives funds from the Cattle Compensation Fund,


should not proceed with its research. If that were the case we would probably receive many complaints from the North-Eastern Province. That fund is used to enable research to be carried out into veterinary problems, and this fund will be used for research into problems concerning bees. Most apiarists in the State will welcome the provision it provides.

The Hon. A. K. BRADBURY (North-Eastern Province) : The Minister of Health is not correct in saying the apiarists are in favour of this Bill. The letter which I quoted in the Chamber tonight comes .from the Apiarists Association of Victoria, not just those in the north-eastern areas. The resolution was carried unanimously by the Apiarists Association of Victoria. At the conference held in Wangaratta of the north-eastern apiarists there were 70 present and likewise a resolution was unanimously carried opposing this measure and deploring the fact that the Government did not have the common decency to consult the apiarists on this Bill. Even officers within the Department of Agriculture were amazed when this Bill was reproduced because there is no justification for it. The Minister of Health should get his facts correct. Unfortunately the Minister of Forests is not in the Chamber at the moment but apiarists throughout Victoria have expressed their opposition to the Bill.

The Committee divided on the clause (the Hon. G. J. Nicol in the chair)-

Ayes 25 Noes 6

Majority clause

Mr. CampbeH Mr. Crozier Mr. Elliot Mr. Galbally Mr. Gleeson Mr. Granter Mr. Grimwade Mr. Gross Mr. Hamilton Mr. Hauser Mr. Hider Mr. Houghton Mr. Hunt

for the

AYES.

Mr. Jenkins Mr. Kent Mr. Knight Mr. Long Mr. Storey Mr. Thomas Mr. Trayling Mr. Tripovich Mr. Walton Mr. Ward

Tellers: Mr. Block Mr. Eddy

19

NOES. Mr. Dunn Tellers: Mr. McDonald Mr. Swinburne Mr. Bradbury Mr. Wright Mr. Clarke

The remaining clauses were agreed to.

The Bill was reported to the House without amendment, and the report was adopted.

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health): I move-

That this Bill be now read a third time. The House divided on the motion

(Sir Raymond Garrett in the chair)-Ayes 26 Noes 6

Majority for the motion

Mr. Block Mr. Crozier Mr. Eddy Mr. Galbally Mr. Gleeson Mr. Granter Mr. Grimwade Mr. Gross Mr. Hamilton Mr. Hauser Mr. Hider Mr. Houghton Mr. Hunt Mr. Jenkins

AyES.

Mr. Kent Mr. Knight Mr. Long Mr. Nicol Mr. Storey Mr. Thomas Mr. Trayling Mr. Tripovich Mr. Walton Mr. Ward

Tellers: Mr. Camp bell Mr. Elliot

NOES. Mr. Bradbury Tellers: Mr. Dunn Mr. McDonald Mr. Clarke Mr. Swinbume Mr. Wright

20

The Bill was read a third time.

AUSTRALIAN TRACTOR TESTING STATION BILL.

The debate (adjourned from May 4) on the motion of the Hon. W. V. Houghton (Minister of Health) for the second reading of this Biil was resumed.

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT (Melbourne West Province): It would have been a sorry state of affairs, Mr. President, if this proposed legislation had not come into being, as the Australian Tractor Testing Station at Werribee would have gone out of existence. The work that has been done at the testing station in putting an imprimatur on various

706 Australian Tractor Testing [COUNCIL.] Station Bill.

tractors has been extremely valuable. I pay tribute to the staff at the testing station for the work they have done in providing an official test for tractors to determine their performance and capabilities in the field.

It should be remembered that today tractors are not confined to the pursuits of agriculture-one sees so many of them in the streets-and the testing carried out at Werribee has also been to the advantage of those involved in industrial pursuits.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: Are they in the more salubrious suburbs, too?

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT: I have seen them working in the salubrious suburbs, even down in the suburb in which the Prime Minister formerly lived.

Tractors are magnificent pieces of machinery. Probably because of the tractor station at Werribee International Harvester Australia Ltd., the Ford Motor Co. of Australia Ltd., and' John Deere Chamberlain Pty., Ltd., in Western Australia, have produced some of the best field tractors we have seen in Australia, and it is in this way that the station has helped revolutionize industrial and agricultural pursuits.

I am pleased that the Government has seen fit to carry on the testing station at Werribee and the Labor Party supports the Bill.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN (NorthWestern Province): This is an important Bill for agriculture in Victoria and, as Mr. Knight said, it deals even with areas relating to tractors and tractor safety outside agriculture. The Australian Tractor Testing Station at Werribee has fulfilled a worth-while role in the past, but I know that many primary producers have not been completely satisfied with the flow of information from the station. Testing tractors is a complicated procedure, particularly when large numbers are involved. There is such a wide range and variety of tractors of all makes and models available that it is difficult for any

testing authority to test them accurately under the types of conditions that are of interest to farmers when they are purchasing a tractor.

As a power unit, the tractor is the most important part of the broadacre farmer's plant, particularly in the type of farming with which I am associated in north-western Victoria and in some other parts of the State. Unfortunately, the data available for farmers is frequently not sufficiently down-to-earth to really assist them. Farmers are more interested in examining field reports and reports of performance under actual working conditions in their own districts than in reports of a technical nature, although they do have some benefit.

Farmers have also told me in the past that information has been a little slow in coming, particularly on a certain model of tractor, and they have found it necessary to make their own evaluations of the model. As the Minister stated, the station was set up in 1962 by the Commonwealth of Australia, the States and the University of Melbourne to serve primary producers throughout the whole of the nation. However, owing to a lack of support-in the Minister's words-for formal tractor tests from members of the Australian Agricultural Council, in February, 1975, it was decided that the Australian Tractor Testing Station should cease operating. Commendably, the Victorian Government has decided to continue the station at Werribee, although its activities will probably be somewhat limited.

To date the station has directed much of its testing and activities to roll-bars or safety frames. I am sure honorable members will be familiar with the arguments which have taken place in this Chamber on the question of tractor roll-bars and safety frames in recent years. The Department of Labour and Industry attempted to impose blanket regulation requiring these throughout all areas of Victoria. At that time my party was able to prove that broadacre farmers, particularly those who

Australian Tractor Testing [11 MAY, 1976.] Station Bill. 707

used high-powered or heavy tractors on land such as that in the Wimmera and Mallee plains, did not require a safety frame and we convinced the Government of this. It has now been left to the shires and municipalities to proclaim whether tractors in their areas should have safety frames and roll-bars. Initially, tractors are equipped with anchors to which safety frames can be fitted if required.

The station has carried out testing on safety frames and has done some study in the field of spark arresters, which is an important factor in the prevention of fire out in the field particularly during the harvest period: I believe the number of fires started by tractors in recent years indicates that we have come a long way in the area of arresting sparks and preventing fire from spreading from the power unit itself.

The Bill will allow the Victorian Government to purchase various buildings on the testing site, to transfer plant and equipment to the University of Melbourne and to reemploy the three persons at present engaged there. It will also largely come under the responsibility of the machinery section of the Department of Agriculture.

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON : Totally.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Totally, yes. I am not against that happening. As I said, the Government is to be commended for keeping the tractor testing station alive, but hopefully in the future it will be able to fulfil a wider range of testing than has been possi ble in the past.

The Victorian Farmers Union has made some significant recommendations . in the .field of tractor safety and m relatIon to the Australian Tractor Testing Station at Werribee. I should like to pay a tribute to Mr. Alvin Peach, who has been involved with tractor safety and modification and with machinery generally for most of his life. He lives in the Wimmera area and has made a significant contribution to the safety

of farm tractors and machinery and I have been fortunate enough to have had many discussions with him on this subject.

The Victorian Farmers Union made a number of recommendations and suggestions to me, at my request, on the future use of the tractor testing station and its role and how, perhaps it can be improved. I should like t~ relate to the House a number of these suggestions which I think are particularly worthy of merit.

Firstly, the union suggests that if there are to be performance tests on tractors, they should relate largely to tra~tors of Australian manufacture, as Imported tractors complicate the field and make it a much more difficult task because of the wide range available. In many cases there is also a considerable amount of information supplied about the performance of these tractors. The Victorian Farmers Union considers that the tractor testing station should largely concentrate its efforts on Australian manufactured tractors, and on those overseas tractors which do not appear to meet the performance specifications set out by the manufacturers.

The union believes any tractor tested at the station should be clearly identified as such in a manner which cannot be covered up or obliterated and that that identification should apply particularly to any tractor used in the testing of protective frames. When a manufacturer of a protective frame or roll-bar wants to have his equipment tested, he must supply not only the equipment to be tested, but also a tractor on which it is to be mounted, and this must be done for each frame and for each model of tractor. Following their presentation at the station the safety frame is tested with heavy weights and frequently substantial damage is done to the tractor. These tractors then find their way back on to the market and are sold to various primary producers.


The Victorian Farmers Union feels that this should not occur, but if it does and a farmer buys one of these tractors he should at least know what has occurred and identification should be clearly visible on the tractor.

The Hon. D. _G. ELLlOT: As to what hazards are involved?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: To say it has been tested, because the testing can cause considerable stress to the structure of the tractor.

As I said before, each frame must be supplied and tested with each model-I will come to that laterand this entails a substantial cost, particularly on the smaller manufacturer of safety equipment.

The Hon. D. G. ELLlOT: Notwithstanding increased overheads, because they are being mass produced, safety frames now cost about onethird of what they cost five years ago.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: They are being mass produced, but there are many smaller manufacturers producing excellent tractor cabins which incorporate safety frames and they have to supply a tractor and frame for wrecking for every model, which could amount to 30, 40 or 50. If they want to cover a wide range the cost is something phenomenal.

The Victorian Farmers Union also believes tractors to be tested should be purchased from the manufacturer at random, to ensure that they are not prepared for the test. They should be random examples of the range of tractors from which the farmer would purchase a tractor from his dealer.

In other words, it should be a random selection instead of asking a manufacturer to supply a fully prepared tractor. They say that once a tractor has been tested details of the test should be made available so that farmers can obtain information before the tractors go on the market-if not then, as soon as possible. This comes back to what I said before. It is essential that any test-

ing to be done, particularly on a new model, should be done quickly and the information be made available to farmers.

I do not know whether or not a committee will be looking into, advising, or in any way controlling the activities of the tractor testing station, or whether it will come completely under the Department of Agriculture. It is my opinion and tha t of many primary producer groups that farmers should have some say in the use of the tractor testing station. An advisory committee has not been mentioned in the Bill. I do not know whether one is envisaged, but some sort of advisory committee should be set up so that it can offer guidance on the operation of the tractor testing station.

I believe and support the claim by the Victorian Farmers Union, the largest farmer union in the State, that one of its members should represent it on that committee land so pass on the views of the practising farmer. The Victorian Farmers Union further states that, if and when funds are available, an officer of the station should attend the many machinery field tests that are held throughout the State, and as an experimen t and extension work should supervise the magnetometer tests being held. These tests look at the sound vibration and so on of tractors. They are a few of the ideas that have been put to me by the Victorian Farmers Union, which represents the active farming body in Victoria.

Tractors have come a long way, not only in safety but also in efficiency. On many farms today are working machines which can cost up to $20,000 and more. They save on the high cost of labour on the farm. Last week I quoted the severe drop in the numbers employed on farms. It has become far more economical for la primary producer to become mechanized. The wheat industry is the most mechanized of any Industry in Victoria.

Australian Tractor Testing [ 11 MAY, 1976.] Station Bill. 709

With mechanization a farm can be operated by one man, and it can become a single farming unit. Therefore. the tractor has become vitally important and great advances have been made.

Finally the stage has been reached where the driver of the tractor is being considered. As many members in this House will realize, old tractors were made for everything but the driver. He was the unfortunate accomplice who found himself sitting on a steel seat. Many of the older tractors had steel wheels and were extremely noisy. I have driven some of the old tractors, and after driving one for fourteen hours, and then waking up after a ten-hour sleep, I could still hear the noise of the tractor in my head. A number of tractor operators and farmers have had their hearing affected through the noise of tractors. Various improvements have been made including the wearing of ear protectors or ear muffs. These were a great innovation but at first were thought to be cissy.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: I do not know how you can say ear muffs are cissy.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: That is the way it w'as. I hope to encourage Mr. EIliot to express his opinion on this Bill. Perhaps he does not need encouragement. Tractors have been greatly improved and are now being made soundproof, and air-conditioned. I trust that the tractor testing s ta tion will be expanded under the guidance of the Department of Agriculture, and that the benefits of its activities will flow quickly on to the farmer to assist him in choosing and operating this important piece of equipment.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT (Melbourne Province): Members of the Opposition are not here to heap praise on the Government wherever and ,vhenever they get the opportunity, but in this instance I give the Government full marks for continuing with this tractor-testing

station. A tractor and its productivity can be improved if it is treated properly, and if the person who drives it is treated properly. I am not certain whether it was Mr. Dunn or one of his colleagues who, at the time of the introduction of the safety bars or cabins on tractors, particularly safety bars, was very vocal in condemnation of the use of safety bars throughout Victoria. Too many members of the farming community are very loath to accept change. I mentioned a week ago that it takes them quite a long time to realize something is good for them and is worth trying.

I want to state the case history of a tractor which was utilized on a farm in which I (had an interest. It was a David Brown 990 and it was bought without any cabin, and without any safety bars. A young man, the manager of the property, decided first of all to put safety bars on it, not because he was working on hilly country but as a safety measure. This provision was introduced far earlier in New South Wales than in Victoria. A cabin was then 'added to the tractor, and after that air conditioning. Then the young man was given ear muffs so he could tune in, if he wished, to the local or national radio station. As Mr. Swinburne has just said, he did not want to get off the tractor. It was so comfortable for him to work on that he did twice the amount of work he would normally have done, and he was a hard-working young man.

The Hon. S. R. McDoNALD: You should have put a cocktail bar in it.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: That 'is a facetious remark. The young man would not see beyond a bottle of beer-not cocktails. The fact remains, when a worker is treated properly-in this case the manager of the property-and he has to plough, scarify and cultivate 200 or 300 acres, and similarly go around with the seed drill and put some sort of crop in, he has to be provided with


proper equipment. Otherwise the owner's overheads are doubled, instead of doubling the outlay on machinery which will pay for itself remarkably quickly. This is why it is pleasing to the farming community as a whole.

I only wish farmers and me'mbers of the National Party would take some notice of the wonderful policies of the Victorian Farmers Union. They take notice only when it suits them. When I read the policies of the Victorian Farmers Union, I find that they 'are so near my own that I am amazed. I was a 'member of the Victorian F'armers Union for some time and I think I must rejoin it.

As I mentioned, it is important that a farmer should have efficient machinery. It is generally considered in the beef industry that provided the terrain is not too difficult, one man with proper machinery can handle up to 500 breeders quite efficiently. I do not know what Mr. McDonald would say; he has been breeding all his life. On top of handling this by himself, a farmer can grow fodder, provided he has the machinery with which to do it.

This testing station should be of great importance to the community. The Minister for State Development and Decentralization in his embryo state supports it very enthUSiastically and certainly the members of the Labor Party do.

The Hon. S. E. GLEESON (SouthWestern Province): In supporting the Bill, I shall perhaps bore the House by going back into the history of tractor testing. As one of the older members of the House, I can remember when I drove a team of horses, and tractor testing goes back to this time. When the tractor first started to be used in any quantity -it was used as a steam driven device in England quite early-it did not run hitched in front of the plough. The plough was drawn with cables, using winding drums and pairs of engines but when gasoline and oil came into use, the oil engine was

put into a frame to haul agricultural machinery. The trouble was to tell what these tractors could haul, 'and farmers were interested to know how a tractor would compare with a team of horses.

The Americans set up a number of testing stations, and the most famous by any account is the Nebraska one. The Nebraska test became the Bible for all farmers buying tractors, and they compared the tractor to a horse team of 5, 6, 7, 10 and so on. It had nothing to do with the horse power equated to a tractor because horse power is a difficult thing to evaluate, as Mr. Watt discovered when trying to equate power with horses when the term "horsepower" was first used. From the Nebraska test one could find out what size tractor one needed to buy to pull the type of plough in use. It was very useful. It was a consumer aid to enable the inexperienced farmer to make a proper choice.

Then the tractor became more sophistica ted. The tests became more elaborate and 'more detailed. I am not going to bore the House with the very large sheet of test results av'ailable to anybody who submitted a tractor to the Nebraska test.

That was where the testing stood, roughly, although there were similar testing stations in Germany, Sweden and Britain. Problems 'arose after the last world war when tractors and farm machinery were at a premium, and everyone wanted a slice of the cake--or whatever colloquial expression one chooses. It was obvious that a good many of the machines turned out then were to meet the desperate shortage and were not adequate.

I am going to mention a few names because I think they are appropriate. The first tractor testing station was, I think, the brain child of Gilbert Vasey who was the head of the School of Agricultural Engineering at the University of Melbourne. In his footsteps followed Bill Bailey. The problem was that

Australian Tractor Testing [11 MAy, 1976.] Station Bill. 711

the School of Agricultural Engineering was financially supported by machinery makers. Here was a difficult situation. A testing station was to be put up to conduct critical tests associated with the University of Melbourne. Also associated with it were all the legal problems, which the legal fraternity here would know, concerning the possible publishing of derogatory statements about a product.

This problem has been dealt with differently throughout the world. In England, the Institute of Agricultural Engineers undertook research on and testing of agricultural machinery at Silisoe, Bedford. The results of the tests were circulated to those who subscribed to their cost. This can be arranged. It is reasonable that if one finances a test, one is entitled to receive the result.

But the project failed because the farmers would not support it even though the cost was relatively small. The English test was much more thorough than ours. As well as the standard tests for power output and various tests of handling, gear ratios and so on, tractors were followed up through private outlets. A number of tractors were selected from private owners and tests were made on tractor wear. A device was hitched to the power take-off to test the engine and there were also reports on faults which developed over a period of use.

This technique is used by the magazine Which. Subscribers to Choice who take the car magazine receive this magazine. A number of faults as well as the wear and the cost involved are published when they are found. This project in England as applied to tractors and farm machinery failed because the farmers did not support it and the Government pulled out of financing it for the few who subscribed.

Saskatchewan, a somewhat social-istic Province. deals with the testing

: of agricultural machinery in a differit ent way. Ho~ they get away with it I :1 am not sure, In the sense that manu-

facturers co-operate to a much greater extent than I would have expected. The requirements of the department there are nearly what we would expect from the English tests and the results are available to everyone. Complaints are received about machinery and they are followed through by departmental people. A close eye is kept on the performance of farm machinery. I do not think we could finance that sort of arrangement here because of the size of this country and the relatively small market.

But what have we done and what might we do? The ordinary concept of tractor testing is outdated. The diesel motor in tractors is now almost universal. Its modifications are so small as to make little difference. Its reliability is unquestioned. It need not be tested for its power output, reliability or suitability. For transmission, gear ratios, power take-offs and so on, standards are set. The only thing that the department can say is that a tractor departs from the recommendations of the Standards Association because of the height of the draw-bar or the setting of the take-off, or the distance between the draw-bar and the take-off, and so on. This information is readily available from technical sources. The subjective tests, such as ease of getting on or off, ease of handling and stability and suitability, are not tackled by testing stations for the reason I mentioned earlier, the possibility of libel disputes.

Gilbert Vasey plumped for random selection so that a manufacturer could not present his best machine which had been run in properly and looked after. That was appropriate when standards of assembly lines were such that there could be a wide variation between tractors with one tractor having the smallest piston size within the tolerance in the largest cylinder size so that the piston would rattle around in the cylinder. Discrepancies are now much less and this big variation in random selection does not exist.


Manufacturers are more responsive to the idea that they have a responsibility. A manufacturer will often come to the party to meet some of the replacement costs when a transmission breaks down or a serious problem arises with a tractor. I have had experience of this. Design faults are generally picked up and replacements are made free of cost. But when, for instance, there is an engine fault resulting from work on the assembly line, the manufacturer will meet some of the costs involved. Another problem is that by the time there is an assessment of long-term wear of a tractor, it is out of date. It is not of much help to be told, after a tractor has failed after 4,000 hours of use, that some others will work for 6,000 or 10,000 hours.

I must pay tribute to other members of the Agricultural Equipment Committee. They include Dr. Lang who represented the graziers, Mr. George Manly and Mr. Paris of the Australian Primary Producers Union, Mr. Roberts from the Victorian Dairyfarmers Association, another Mr. Roberts of the Institute of Agricultural Science and Mr. E. K. Simmons, from the Department of Agriculture. I apologize to those I have left out if they ever read this, which is doubtful. I am speaking from memory. We found that the reason farmers bought equipment was not so much because they had carefully read the logical tests and made a decision. It was due to a company having a good local agent, a financially satisfactory trade-in, and probably because the farmer had left it until his machine had broken down and he took the first replacement he could get. These reasons were more important than carefully processed tests. It could be said that these tests are mostly of academic interest to people who do not buy tractors.

The tests were not of much use to the manufacturers, who relied on a great many other tests, particularly as most of them had overseas affilia-

The Hon. S. E. Gleeson.

tions. For instance, the manufacturers of the Perkins diesel engine would not take much notice of an Australian test when their market throughout the world is so large.

Australia has certain different approaches to agriculture, as Mr. Dunn pointed out, and requirements different from those in other parts of the world. It is difficult to persuade manufacturers to consider these in over-all terms. I know they are doing more. The improvement in headers is obvious, but the improvement in tractors is not so obvious. Despite what Mr. Dunn said, with the old-fashioned tractor the operator could at least get up and stretch his legs on the platform. The type of noise was different. Exhaust noise was perhaps just as high but the vibration from the transmission was not nearly so tiring. I have given up driving tractors for long periods but I know that the transmission hum, whine, or scream, almost, is worse than the exhaust noise.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: That has been overcome to a great extent with the floating type of cabin.

The Hon. S. E. GLEESON: That is so. With some operations an operator must turn around a great deal. He must have a universal joint . on his neck or have a seat on which he can turn easily and which he can sometimes ride side-saddle. The problems of individual Australian requirements would be difficult to satisfy through any testing authority. I am not denigrating the work on safety bars. One recommendation which was not mentioned was the work on spark arrestors. When the Country Fire Authority required all tractors to be equipped with suitable spark arrestors the tractor testing station was the only authority which could say what was a suitable spark arrestor. They set up a testing rig to analyse carbon particle and so on. Anyone who farmed in the old days will remember the problems. I remember one Lanz Bulldog tractor which sent out huge lumps

Australian Tractor Testing [11 MAY, 1976.] Station Bill. 713

of burning carbon. Obviously the spark arrestor was not working; it was more of a spark causer.

I have given some reasons why the problems of setting up and running a tractor testing authority are more complex than most people realize. When the committee or group which looks into this makes recommendations, I should like to see Bill Bailey, who is dedicated to the job, still carrying out this sort of work. I hope the authority will arrange that the work that is done is appreciated by farmers and suitable for their requirements.




Clause 2 (Public Service Employment) .

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health): Such an interesting debate cannot be allowed to go without comment. I congratulate those who took part in it for their contributions. The idea of Mr. Dunn, of an advisory committee on tractor testing which, I presume, would consist of consumers of tractors, would be very useful. I commend him for the suggestion and I shall certainly direct it to the attention of the Minister. As usual, Mr. Gleeson's contribution was interesting. As indicated, what counts most in a farmer's choice of a tractor is whether he can have it properly serviced. It has been my experience that if one lives in an area where Massey-Ferguson (Australia) Ltd. has the best agent and service organization, everyone uses Massey-Ferguson tractors. In a n area where the service agent of International Harvester Australia Ltd. is the best, the local farmers have International tractors. Honorable members who have had anything to do with the country will know what I mean when I say that it is: possible to identify the best

tractor servicing agent in a district by the tractors one sees working in the paddocks.

The Bill has the support of all parties and also the Minister of Labour and Industry for whom this tractor testing station could provide some useful statistics and data. The Minister for State Development and Decentralization also supports its continuation, as the station could provide facilities for testing other agricultural machinery. The Government welcomes the support for the Bill.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN (NorthWestern Province): I thank the Minister for his statement that the Government will consider my suggestions. Persons involved at the station could well look at my earlier suggestion concerning the use of a separate tractor for each protective frame being tested. This constitutes a heavy burden on small manufacturers and perhaps the station could use some sort of adjustable mounting platform on which to test the frames without putting the individual tractor through extreme stresses and therefore causing financial loss and possible problems for any future user of the tractor. I again raise this point with the Minister and thank him for his consideration of the views submitted.

The clause was agreed to. The Bill was reported to the House

without amendment, and passed through its remaining stages.

LIQUEFIED GASES (AMENDMENT) BILL.

The debate (adjourned from May 4) on the motion of the Hon. F. J. Granter (Minister of Water Supply) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT (Melbourne West Province): In the petro-chemical industry, safety requirements in the production and transportation of liquefied gases have

714 Liquefied Gases [COUNCIL.] (Amendment) Bill.

always been of paramount importance. Many years ago, I can recall the importance that companies placed on the training of operators. I am pleased that this outlook still exists in the industry, perhaps with the exception of a few companies.

When one sees large motor vehicles and ships transporting inflammable and toxic gases around the State, one can imagine the danger to society if they are not conveyed under proper and strict conditions. The Mines Department, mainly through the inflammable liquids section, sees that the safety requirements are carried out, although this lazy, incompetent Government has not proclaImed the Liquefied Gases Act 1968. I pay tribute to the officers of the Mines Department for their excellent work in undertaking their tedious duties and strenuously invoking the provisions of an Act which has never been proclaimed. This was probably achieved mainly by bluff, but good luck to them. Presumably, the officers rely on the Inflammable Liquids Act and not the Liquefied Gases Act.

Fortunately, although the Government and honorable members oppO!ite have shown scant regard for the safety of employees in the petrochemical industry, I am pleased that in the main employers have taken the matter to heart and trained their staffs properly because of the hazardous nature of the industry. From personal experience in the industry and from living close to the refineries, I know how dangerous it can be.

As a proud citizen of the City of Altona, which is a more salubrious suburb than Toorak-the Government will not even extend the railway line to Wiltona-and has many great petro-chemical complexes situated within its boundaries and in the adjacent City of Williamstown, every day I become more aware of the increasing inherent dangers.

Hydrocarbon Processing and Petroleum Refiner of November, 1965 which is not available in the Par~

The Hon. A. W. Knight.

liamentary Library-I am referring to my personal copy-contains a chart relating to the manufacture of Ethylene (Lurgi-Ruhrgas). Fortunately, my training has enabled me to understand the processes involved. In regard to this product, the publication states-

Charge: Crude oil or any mineral oil product from ethane to residual oil, including liquefied petroleum gas, light naphtha and heavy distillates.

Basically this places hydrocarbons in the category of liquefied gases. Indigenous crudes come into Australia from Bass Strait, from which the Government should have obtained better royalties-I hear the shareholders of those companies making loud noises from the other side of the Chamber-but still we have to import crudes from Bahrain. These products are transported under considerable pressure, but thank goodness the Mines Department is efficient and ensures that the safety requirements are complied with.

Liquefied gases are transported through the WAG Pipeline Pty. Ltd. pipeline to the refineries of Petroleum Refineries (Aust.) Pty. Ltd. and then broken down to tails and fractions. Fortunately, officers of the Mines Department understand the problems. It does not become any Government, irrespective of what political party is in power, to delay the proclamation of an Act which ensures the safety of people involved in the production and the transport of liquefied gases.

The derivatives of liquefied petroleum gas have many uses. I do not want to delay the House with an oration on the problems associated with the industry. Fortunately, the operators are trained and the safety precautions are laid down. These precautions have been formulated as a result of overseas experience. Fortunately, the safety record in the industry has been good, due to the vigilance of the Mines Department, which has been castigated from time to time.

Liquefied Gases [11 MAY, 1976.] (Amendment) Bill. 715

Some problems have occurred in my own area. On one occasion, a person was incinerated by a fire caused by the emission of gas. One can understand the problems with gas bottles used for caravans and I trust that the regulations will cover these items. One wonders how many lives have been endangered and persons have suffered first, second or third degree bums because the Government has not proclaimed the Bill. I know of one accident in which a woman was injured by a faulty gas bottle.

Any person can go to a service station and have a gas bottle filled with liquefied petroleum gas and no test is made of the bottle. The operators are not licensed to fill the bottles. Bottle-filling stations should be licensed so that, if the operator breaches the Act or any safety requirements, the Mines Department can take away his permit. Today, the operator does not know whether a bottle is up to standard.

In many instances, the filling facilities are dangerously situated, because other highly inflammable products are also located in the same area. Members of the Liberal Party have never studied these aspects.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett): Mr. Knight, is this relevant?

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT: Yes, because the Bill lays down that certain penalties shall apply for breaches concerning the handling of liquefied gases. In my own province, liquefied gases are transported to local service stations. Fortunately, the refineries lay down more stringent conditions regarding transport than the Gas and Fuel Corporation applies to its employees. The employees in the industry are greatly concerned about transport and also about certain contractors in private enterprise who transport liquefied gases in certain areas. They are not qualified and do not do it correctly, and the employees must go out

and remedy the situation. These are some of the basic principles that should be followed for safety purposes when handling hazardous liquid gases. Liquid gas cannot be seen but it can be smelt. Damage can occur when people have a lackadaisical and laissez fain~ attitude and smoke around the area. It has been fortunate that a great conflagration has not occurred around petrol filling stations because of liquefied petroleum gas in transportation.

I am concerned -about some of the provisions of this Bill. My first concern is the definition of " person" as contained in clause 13. Having read the Acts Interpretation Act of 1958 I ask the Minister whether a person is sufficiently defined in the Bill. I refer to section 17 of the Acts Interpretation Act No. 6189 which states-

The expression "person" shall include a corporation unless there is something repugnant to or inconsistent with the interpre· tation.

I ask the Minister whether that covers liquefied gases. If not, there is an anomaly. An employee under instruction from the management can carry out certain directions and be held responsible. I suggest to the Minister that more stringent regulations should apply. Written instructions should be given. I know instructions regarding filling of liquefied petroleum gas containers are carried out in some cases at the direction of the ,Mines Department. Those instructions should be written down because an employee might have a grudge against his employer and might want to get even. The written instruction would protect the management and vice versa. This procedure is not new. It is carried out in the greatest industry in Australia-the State Electricity Commission. There could be no backfire then and if the employee did not follow the written instruction at least the inspector from the inflammable liquids section of the Mines Department could point to that fact. I have great admiration for the inspectors who carry out tiring work with a shortage of staff. How many inspectors 'are there in the country?


I have asked the Government's two responsible Ministers but they cannot give me an answer to that question.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: They have electricity in the country.

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT: The Minister is interjecting about electricity. I defy him to prove that the province which he represents is all electric and liquefied gases are not used. The honorable gentleman represents Portland and liquefied gas is distributed in that area and in Hamilton. The Minister should do his homework. Not long ago problems arose in Hamilton regarding liquefied gas.

One cannot mess around with explosives or hazardous substances. Anybody who has been trained in the industry knows the problem. I ask the Minister about the definition of a person rand I suggest that if that definition 'is not covered by the Acts Interpretation Act it should be clarified.

Through the 'auspices of the Minister for Fuel and Power, whom I thank sincerely, I conferred with officers from the Mines Department. Although I appreciate the advice that I received from those officers regarding the double penalties, I am not satisfied that double penalties provide sufficient safeguard. There is an old saying in British justice, which has been proved in the courts, that once a man has been given a penalty he cannot be given a second penalty. I ask the Minister to explain how the second penalty occurs. I do not support the employee who puts his fellow workmates into a hazardous pDsition with danger .of injury or loss of life or limb. However, the Labor Party opposes the imposition of two penalties.

For these reasons the Labor Party supports the principles of the Bill and berates the Government for its inept, incompetent ,attitude in not introducing this Bill or proclaiming the father of this Bill six years ago.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN (NorthWestern Province): The National Party supports the basic objectives

of this Bill. However, it is mystified as to why the Government has as yet not proclaimed the 1968 legislation. The House finds itself in the unusual situation tonight of amending legislation that has not yet been put into effect. I think the matter requires some explanation by the ,Minister. It is amazing tha t in 1968 the Government introduced legislation to control and improve safety measures relating tD liquefied gases and has not put that legislation into force. No doubt at that time some urgency existed for the legislation but it has since been inoperative in Victoria.

The N ation-al Party believes safety precautions must be taken to protect the consumer, the general public, employers and employees and all people handling liquefied gases. The Bill is technical and I am sure the House will be gratified to learn that I do not intend going into detail on the clauses. The National Party supports the measure in principle and hopes the Bill will have the effect of improving the ,safety in handling and use of liquefied gases in the future.

The motion w'as agreed to. The Bill was read a second time and

committed.

Clause 1 was agreed to. Clause 2 (Amendment of No. 7754

s. 1).

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER (Minister of Water Supply): This debate has been interesting because a member of the House has a great knowledge of this industry, especially as he lives in the area where the industry is active. I thank Mr. Knight and also Mr. Dunn for their contributions. Both honorable members asked why the 1968 Act has not been proclaimed and I shall endeavour to explain that to the best of my ability. Mr. Knight also referred to the necessity for safety in the transport of liquefied gases. I am sure that all honorable members agree wholeheartedly with that contention. The honorable member ,also paid due reference to officers of the Mines Department. I have always found them willing tD provide

Liquefied Gases [11 MAY, 1976.] (Amendment) Bill. 717

me with information on problems that I have raised with them, whether as a Minister OT as a member.

The delay in proclaiming the 1968 Act does seem long. Much time has been spent in drafting the regulations. I am informed that the regulations consist of several hundreds of pages dealing with liquefied petroleum gases, liquefied oxygen, chlorine, ammonia, and other liquefied gases.

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT: Each gas has to have 'its individual record.

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER: Yes. It is also difficult to find capable officers to draft these regulations as it is a specialist's job. I am hopeful that it will not be long before the regulations and the Act are proclaimed and made operational. I 'Offer that explanation to the Committee and to the two honorable members who spoke during the debate.

Mr. Knight also asked about the number of inspection staff. I cannot say how many there are but I believe that in the past eighteen months three new inspectors have been added to the staff working on inflammable liquid inspection under the Inflammable Liquids Act. Also six scientific officers and engineers work with both inflammable liquids and liquefied gases. The design and construction of cylinders for all types of gases is controlled by the Boilers an.d Pressure Vessels Act.

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT: There are not sufficient inspectors to carry ou t the work.

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER: The chief inspector of boilers and pressure vessels is attached to the Department of Labour and Industry.

Mr. Knight also raised the question of the interpretation of persons. The definition on page 10 of the Acts Interpretation Act 1958 states -

The expression cc person" shall include a corporation unless there is something repugnant to or inconsistent with that interpretation. The effect of the clause is as it should be. It does not distinguish between the employer and the em-

Session 1976.-25

ployee in regard to their basic duty under the Act to carry out duties in a responsible and careful way. In the event of a breach of that duty, either the employee or the employer or both, depending on the circumstances, might be held accountable.

However, in this context of obligation to maintain safety, it must be kept in mind that in addition to the injunction contained in clause 13, proper precautions must be taken.

The regulations to be made under the Act will also set out extensive and detailed requirements about equipment, operation procedures and specific precautions that are applicable to particular cases. A perusal of section 22 of the principal Act, which is to be modified by the amendment proposed in clause 17 of the Bill, will give an indication of the range of matters that are to be dealt with by the regulations. I did not follow the honorable member's reference to double penalties; perhaps he will raise it when the relevan t clause is being discussed.

The clause was agreed to, as were clauses 3 and 4.

Clause 5 (Amendment of No. 7754 s. 4).

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT (Melbourne West Province): Although I appreciate what the Minister said, he has still not satisfied the Opposition that safety precautions which the Government has so blatantly disregarded will be enforced. The Minister could not tell the House how many more inspectors would be appointed to ensure that the bottles, which are the main concern of the people who have to carry out inspectorial duties in the Mines Department, will be tested. It is all right for the Minister to say that there is a long list of regulations, but if I were an inspector of the Mines Department I would not like to have to read the 200 pages of regulations to find out what my duties were. I have great admiration for the competent men in the


Mines Department and make no disparaging remarks about them, because I have worked with them both as an employee and as a union advocate.

However, more inspectors are needed to examine the bottles. When a person goes into a garage to have a bottle filled with liquefied gas, the attendant will fill the bottle even if he does not have a permit, but the bottle may not have been tested. The sooner a written warning is placed on the bottle, the better it will be. The marking on the cylinder does not indicate that if a person fills the cylinder with gas he may lose his licence. The sooner the Government concerns itself with safety, the better it will be. The Opposition is concerned about people; the Government is not.

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER (Minister of Water Supply): I refute the statement of Mr. Knight that the Government is not concerned about people. Any responsible person is concerned about people, 'and I assure Mr. Knight that the Government is just as concerned as he is.

Mr. Knight made his point well on inspectors; he claimed that there is a need for more inspectors. I am sure that when the Minister of Mines in another place reads the report of this debate, he will note what Mr. Knight said.

When speaking on clause 2 of the Bill I mentioned that three new inspectors have been 'added to the staff in the past twelve to eighteen months. I take it that Mr. Knight believes this is not enough and that more should be appointed?

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT: That is right.

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER: Mr. Knight also said he would not like to have to study the 200 pages of regulations and carry them out. I agree with that, and I would not like to do so either. I only hope they can be condensed to fewer than 200 pages, although I have been advised

that the regulations are difficult to draft and consist of several hundred pages.


Clause 8 (Conditions of storage and transport to be as presented).

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT (Melbourne West Province): I thank the Minister for his remarks concerning the definition of the term "person" and his assurance that it is covered by the Acts Interpratation Act. The employees in the industry will also be grateful. I thank the honorable gentleman for the assurance that he gave, which the Minister of Mines in another place would not give.



The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT (Melbourne West Province): When I referred to a double penalty, I was referring to clause 11 (cl) of the Bill which states that-where he has reasonable cause to believe that a person has contravened this Act or the regulations, he may seize detain and remove any equipment, vaporizer or appliance used for or in connexion with the supply, transfer, storage, transportation, sale, handling or use of liquified gas.

This provision gives the inspector wide discriminatory powers. As I said during my second-reading speech, that is a second penalty. If the employee has transgressed the orders of the employer, 'a double penalty is imposed on the employer unless written instructions have been provided.

The Minister might well say that this is covered in the regulations, but the employer as well as the employee should be protected in this regard. Verbal instructions can be misused and abused from time to time. The Minister for Local Government is well versed in the law and knows that in legal proceedings the employer and the employee must both be safeguarded and written instructions must be given.

Governor's Speech: [11 MAY, 1976.] Address-in-Reply. 719

I trust that a double penalty would not be imposed if an employee misused or did not carry out the instructions of his employer, and that the same would apply if the employee had carried out the instructions of the employer, but when the inspector came around he hid behind the cover of a coward by saying that the employee had disregarded his instructions. I trust that this aspect will be included in the written regulations.

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER (Minister of Water Supply): I can only say to Mr. Knight that I believe this would be so included, and that the employee and employer are equally responsible. I shall certainly direct the point to the attention of the Minister of Mines in another place.



GOVERNOR'S SPEECH. ADDRESS-IN-REPLY.

The debate (adjourned from May 4) on the motion of the Hon. P. D. Block (Boronia Province) for the adoption of an Address-in-Reply to the Governor's Speech was resumed.

The Hon. F. S. GRIMWADE (Bendigo Province): I have much pleasure in responding to the address given to this House by His Excellency the Governor in this debate on the motion for the adoption of an Address-in -Reply.

One sees with pride the way that His Excellency the Governor and Lady Winneke have carried out their duties as the representatives of Her Majesty the Queen. Recently I was fortunate enough to see these two people entertain in Government House 250 young men and women at a presentation for Queen's Guide and Queen's Scout. All those who were present were impressed by the

way in which the Governor and his wife carried out their duties and brought Her Majesty the Queen to the people of Victoria.

I should also like to reaffirm my loyalty to the Queen, and I look forward to the opportunity of visiting the United Kingdom later this year and perhaps getting closer to the home of the Parliament of Parliaments.

Earlier in one of the debates in this House a member of the Opposition accused the Government of being lazy and inept. This phrase has been used on several occasions, and I should have thought that, if the person who used it had read the Governor's Speech, he would have noted the number of initiatives that are being taken by the Government. I should like to dwell brieflyon five of the new initiatives.

Firstly, I draw attention to the establishment of a State Film Corporation. This is a particularly exciting move which I am certain all Victorians will welcome in due course. In recent years the making of films in Australia has greatly increased. In the early days of Australia's history a considerable number of feature films were made and then the industry went into the doldrums. It appeared that when producers produced films in Australia there was great difficulty in having them screened and presented to the public. Recently some excellent films have been produced and have received world acclaim.

The Hon. S. R. McDoNALD: Such as The Adventures of Bazza McKenzie!

The Hon. F. S. GRIMW ADE: That is one, and also Alvin Purple. A number of these films have attracted much attention. Today I learnt that the film Picnic at Hanging Rock has grossed $1 mjllion. That is a great success story in itself. I hope this new corporation will provide a great deal of encouragement to young people in Australia. Firstly, it is such a high-risk industry that capital to enable films to be made is not always

720 Governor's Speech: [COUNCIL.] Address-in-Reply.

forthcoming. Therefore, obviously one would look to the corporation to provide finance. Then it should encourage the excellence of the whole range of people involved in the film process, the actors, the producers, the editors, also the sound equipment and the actual film cutting, splicing, editing, and so on. The corporation should also help in the distribution of the films so that Australians can see films produced by Australians, and in the context of this initiative, Victorians see what Victorians have produced.

Three most successful films that have come to my notice recently are Picnic at Hanging Rock, End Play, which was based around a character who drove to Kyneton, and a new film which is being produced at the town of Maldon called The Break of Day. It is interesting that each of these films is set within the Bendigo Province. If I needed to bring the debate back to a parochial level, I am pleased to say that it appears there are a number of excellent subjects that can be used in these films within the Bendigo Province.

The second initiative to which I draw attention is the establishment of the small business corporation. In Australia there are a number of small businesses. The latest figure I have seen indicates that 96'5 per cent of the 60,000-odd businesses in Australia employ fewer than 100 employees. Therefore, small business is most important to the economy of Australia.

I also point out that small businesses naturally have a great percentage of Australian ownership. Anything the Government can do to promote the health of small business is most important and vital to the community. The establishment of this corporation, not as a rescue operation to help those who are in trouble, but more as a corporation to promote the long-time health and viability of small business, is most important. Practically the same attitudes are needed by the corporation

The Hon. F. S. Grimwade.

to its industry as are instanced with the State Film Corporation to its industry. Advice, help, access to adequate finance, and knowledge of where to go are necessary. This corporation should be a source of information to assist managements to obtain the necessary skills. I am also pleased that this corporation will encourage and support managerial skills, by co-opting and helping the chambers, institutes and associations which already have these courses available for people interested in the particular lines of business.

The third initiative which I find interesting touches on a matter raised by Mr. Gleeson and myself several years ago when participating in the debate on the motion for the adoption of an Address-in-Reply. It concerns the use of energy and the need to conserve it. The Governor, in his Speech, stated that a White Paper on energy is being prepared and a Bill will be introduced to appoint a Joint Select Committee of Parliament to investigate all means of conserving energy. At first glance it might be assumed that the White Paper will be principally concerned with the conservation of fossil fuels, petroleum and coal derivatives, and perhaps hydro-electric generation and power, rather than addressing itself to the other types of energy sources.

I should like to believe that this committee and the White Paper which will be produced will also address themselves to solar and wind energy. Strangely enough, for some time Australia has led the world in wind energy. The windmill that is used in country areas has been unique for many years. Australia has developed the use of windmills to draw water up from the depths of the ground and in more recent years to provide electricity in rural areas. It would be good if this form of creation of energy was furthered by an investigation by Parliament.

Recently solar energy has attracted the attention of many people. It seems natural that a country such as

Governor's Speech : [11 MAY, 1976.] Address-in-Reply. 721

Australia, with large areas of hot, dry and arid climate and environment, should be to the forefront of the world in harnessing solar energy. However, I put forward the concept of one other form of harnessing solar energy. Many people do not regard the agricultural world as a harnesser of solar energy, but indeed it is. In simplest form, the sun with its heat and light enables trees to grow, and the trees when cut down produce wood which can be burnt to give heat and light. One can go into a whole range of much more complicated ways in which solar energy is harvested by agriculture. A more complex aspect would be the growing of grain. The grain is then distilled, either into alcohol for humans to drink, engines to burn, or all sorts of other processes that the modern world requires.

I draw attention to the fact that the School of Agriculture and Forestry at the University of Melbourne has carried out research into the harvesting of energy by agriculture. Professor Tribe made an interesting survey of some dairy farms in Gippsland, in terms of the input and output of energy in the operation of a dairy farm. The survey found that a number of dairy farms were harvesting energy but were using less energy than they were selling off the farm. Others were the reverse. They were users of energy. If we are to have agriculture that will be viable for many hundreds of years, we will have to revert to agriculture being a net harvester of energy as opposed to a net user. It will be an interesting committee of inquiry. I hope it will come up with some answers.

The Hon. S. R. McDoNALD: Do you think the committee should look at the production of methane gas from animal manure?

The Hon. F. S. GRIMWADE: Yes, this is an interesting way to harvest energy. For the information of honorable members who do not know of the process, manure from pig sties

or feed lots of cattle is collected and allowed to ferment with bacteria and produce methane gas. I have heard it suggested that a certain man has so constructed his own gas producer that he runs his house and hot water system off the fermentation process.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: Off the septic tank?

The Hon. F. S. GRIMWADE: That is correct. Another initiative which was referred to by the Governor was that the Government would try to promote and encourage the development of Victoria as a garden State. This sounds a simple initiative but when one considers it, the one thing Victoria has over other States is a magnificent Mediterranean type climate, although at present pastoral areas are very short of water. Victoria has the advantages of a magnificent climate for home gardens. I hope the promotion of Victoria as a garden State will take many and varied forms. Recently I noticed that the Department of Agriculture was offering courses for home gardeners at the Burnley Research Station. I made inquiries about enrolment in this course, and discovered that the course was so popular that at that time it was booked out for about eight months. That indicates a tremendous demand for people in Victoria to learn more about home gardening and it would seem natural that greater provision must be made for such courses.

The final initiative is contained in that part of the Speech which says that this year provision will be made in the State Budget for the abolition of probate duty on all property passing to one spouse on the death of the other. I believe this is a reform that is well and truly needed. I have on several occasions mentioned in the House during the Address-in-Reply debate the need for a revision of probate duty and the way this iniquitous tax is placed upon a deceased person's estate.

722 Governor's Speech : [COUNCIL.] Address-in-Reply.

The Hon. H. R. WARD: Would the honorable member like to comment on a single-parent family where this occurs?

The Hon. F. S. GRIMWADE: I should like to go into this again but I am referring only to the situation in the farming industry. At present the value of the land on which a farmer farms is probably 75 per cent of his capital assets. If he is to live on that land and hand on to the next generation a farm which is of a viable size, all things being equal, it is quite ridiculous to expect at his death an extremely large probate duty to be extracted from his estate. I suggest that where rural land forms part of an estate, probate duty should not be levied on it until the land is sold.

This would mean that the probate duty would remain as a tax on that property to be collected when the property is finally sold, but that the property would remain intact and that a dairy farmer who was milking 100 cows would not be forced to sell one-third of his property to pay probate duty. It is only at the time of the sale of the property that the money would be collected. That is perhaps one way of ameliorating what I believe is a very bad tax. It would be much better to remove it completely, as I said previously in the House, and I stick by that.

In the meantime, as the Government is going part of the way towards removing probate duty I wish it would take that further step again and remove immediately the need to pay probate duty, particularly on rural properties. With those few words I should like again to congratulate His Excellency, the Governor, on the way in which he has carried out his duties in Victoria and to thank him for his address and the opportunity of responding to it.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN (NorthWestern Province): I am pleased to have the opportunity of speaking, not

for a long period, and of making some remarks in reply to the address by His Excellency, the Governor, made in this Chamber when he outlined the programme of the Victorian Government for the next three years.

I should like, as other members have, to express my widespread agreement with the way in which His Excellency, the Governor, Sir Henry Winneke, and also Lady Winneke are carrying out their duties in Victoria. I should like to commend them most sincerely for the way in which they are moving around the State, as Sir Rohan Delacombe did, meeting people and giving people in country areas, such as in the vast area of the North-Western Province, the opportunity of meeting and talking to them in person. That is a very fine thing and members of the National Party appreciate it very much.

I could not help feeling when I read the programme of the Government, that most of these promises have been made before. Many things have been promised by the Victorian Government and it has taken a long time for some of the promises to be implemented. The people of Victoria are still being promised such things, as a solution to the housing problems, when Liberal Governments have been in power for dec~des in Victoria.

The question that Victorian people ask is why have not these important areas of need in Government administration and responsibility been tackled previously? Why has not the Government overcome some of these problems instead of at election time offering a new round of promises? As was seen in the election campaign earlier this year, the Government was hoping to overcome all sorts of problems, such as helping young people to purchase a home and land, overcoming the critical housing shortage and remedying various other fau1ts. It occurs to me that these problems should have been solved a long time ago instead of

Governor's Speech : [11 MAY, 1976.] Address-in-Reply. 723

being once again pulled out and used as election promises. It is not a satisfactory situation when 18,500 people, which includes approximately 13,000 families, are awaiting Housing Commission homes in Victoria.

Country water supplies are not satisfactory. Many country towns and cities in Victoria, even the City of Horsham, which is the capital of the Wimmera, had water restrictions earlier this summer. Admittedly in Horsham it was a supply problem and something is being done to overcome that. There is a shortage of water in Horsham and in many country towns and cities the quality of the water is poor. These problems need tackling and a greater degree of Government support is needed to assist water trusts.

Many transport problems have developed in country areas. A transport crisis prevails in the country at present. It has occurred in some instances because of the withdrawal of air services, which I know are perhaps not looked upon by many people as necessary. However, the Minister for State Development and Decentralization will agree with me that an air service to a country region is of tremendous advantage. Air services are not now operating to many parts of Victoria. A service was operating to Horsham and Warracknabeal.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: Why did the services cease operating?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: It was uneconomic to operate the service. If air services are to operate they would probably require some sort of assistance to provide those links.

There are other needs in transport which I shall outline and which are much more basic and essential. I refer to the closure of many rail services. The Bland Report into the Victorian Land Transport System recommended that certain cuts be made in the inland transport network and largely in the operations of the Victorian Railways. To my knowledge a similar report has

not been made into the metropolitan network, particularly on the economies that could be made in the metropolitan rail transport system.

The Hon. H. M. HAMILTON: The honorable member should examine the metropolitan transportation study.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: I should like to see a report similar to the one which was brought in and which affects country Victoria. The Bland report recommended the cessation of five rail motor services serving people in the North-Western Province and recommended the closure of many other services throughout Victoria. Admittedly, in some cases bus services will be introduced to replace these rail motors. In some cases, as has happened in the Horsham and Goroke areas, it was found that the bus service had been threatened with closure and some action had been taken to try to keep it going in the immediate future.

If the railways withdraw their services and if adequate safeguards are not taken to ensure that bus operators can provide a service or are able to continue operating it in the future, these areas will be left without any public transport whatsoever. That is a very serious situation for people such as pensioners and students and for people who do not possess their own private transport. I shall first examine the situation of the pensioner.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: Students get transport.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: I am not criticizing that.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: The honorable member also referred to pensioners.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: And to students who are attending colleges in Melbourne.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: They would not want a bus service in the country.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Many of them travel by train.


The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: Every day?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Not every day, but the train service is their only real link with home. Perhaps they go home for long week-ends. If they go home for holidays or for other reasons, many of them use public transport.

Many pensioners in the metropolitan area have public transport within a reasonable distance, whether it be train or tram. That transport can take them to medical facilities, to doctors, to dentists, and perhaps to hospitals ; it can take them shopping or wherever they want to go. Pensioners who live in the country where no public transport is available and who do not have their own car are isolated and cut off. They must rely on friends or members of their family from whom they must " bot" a ride to attend necessary services, such as doctors and hospitals.

The Hon. H. R. WARD: Transport cannot be provided for all sorts of places.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Pensioners have been able to receive dental treatment at dental hospitals in Melbourne.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: If they are lucky.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN : That is so. I am giving only one example but there are many other persons who receive treatment in areas such as Ballarat. If no public transport is operating, their link with the capital city or with cities such as Ballarat is cut off.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: Would they not have train transport to Ballarat?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Yes, they would have main line transport by train.

The Hon. W. M. CAll,lPBELL: Is transport available from their home to the main line?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: No, it is not. Of course, trains run regularly on main lines such as the Melbourne to Adelaide line but the lines that connect with the main line are the difficulty. People from areas in the north and from other places travel to the main line in order to link up with the major rail service.

The Hon. H. R. WARD: Do you advocate a dental clinic in each major city?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: That is something that is being worked on very strongly.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: Or an efficient method of travelling.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Yes, that is a possibility. The point is that taxi services are not available in the majority of country towns. In Warracknabeal the hospital is located away from the centre of the town, and pensioners find it difficult to get to and from the hospital under their own steam.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: With all its toughness, and it is tough in the country, I know where I would sooner be living.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: So do I. There is no way known to me that would take me from the country because of its many advantages. However, it is our job and duty as members representing country areas to overcome the deficiencies.

There is a case for assistance to be given in establishing taxi services and for subsidies for pensioners to use those services in cases where no public transport is available. It is recognized by the Government that pensioners should have concessions on trains and trams. If no public transport is available why should not pensioners be entitled to similar assistance for taxis to give them some link and some transportation?

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: Simply because there are trams, trains and buses in Melbourne, that does not

Governor's Speech: [11 MAy, 1976.] Address-in-Reply. 725

mean that every pensioner who wants to go to a dental clinic or attend a medical service has those services available. There are plenty of areas in the city where they are not available, the same as in the country.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: I realize that.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: Mr. Dunn is saying that they should have taxi services provided also.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: I believe a real need exists for this, not only in country areas. I refer to assistance for starting taxi services and helping them to operate. The Government should investigate the possibility of providing some assistance by way of fare subsidies. I do not know whether that is possible.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: Is that when pensioners go for medical treatment?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Yes, medical treatment and other necessary services.

I have suggested, as have other members of my party, that motor registration concessions should be granted by the Government for pensioners who find it necessary to maintain their own motor vehicles. I realize that a concession is available for totally and permanently incapacitated persons and some other sections of the community, but a concession is not available to pensioners generally. The costs of running a car are extremely high and many of them find it necessary to do so ; otherwise, they are completely cut off from the rest of the community, particularly in country areas.

In the Wimmera an experiment for a regional freight concept has been introduced by the Victorian Railways. The idea is to freight goods direct to Horsham, Warracknabeal and Nhill and to provide road transport to distribute the goods. Over a period of years I have tried to obtain information about the operation of the centre to release to the people whom

I represent because it is a major departure from the existing system. For instance, a total of 45 personnel will be affected by the operation of this freight centre in that small area. Of that total, 34 railway men will be transferred out of the area and 11 caretakers dismissed. They will be replaced by 4 line supervisors, 4 labourers, 7 signal assistants, and 1 assistant station master. This major overhaul is of vital concern to the people, and although I have asked questions on numerous occasions only recently have I been given any information.

The Hon. O. G. JENKINS: Did ·Mr. Dunn have any discussions with local departmental officers?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Yes, on numerous occasions, and I have raised the matter many times by letter and by questions in this House. During the election campaign I forwarded a telegram to the then Minister of Transport when a rumour was circulating that a number of stations would be closed; in fact, many of them are to be closed.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: Could Mr. Dunn mention a few stations which will be affected?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Yes, I can supply Mr. Elliot with any number and I will come to them shortly. I asked the Minister of Transport for an urgent report on the future of railway stations on the Bolangum to Rupanyup, Murtoa to Hopetoun, Horsham to Goroke and Dimboola to Rainbow lines. The Minister replied with the stock answer about the changes of the freight centre but did not detail any information concerning the railway stations I had asked about. I questioned the Government during 1973 and 1974 and was given answers along the lines that the Government was examining the frequency of the service and that it was expected that no concrete decision would be made on what was to happen concerning the future of railway stations or


the quality of the service provided until further investigations had been made.

I was attacked in an article in the Wimmera-Mail Times by an unknown spokesman for the railways claiming that I was trying to mislead by misrepresenting the facts. What I did was to present to the paper the questions and answers supplied to me in this House relating to the staff problems and the staffing arrangements for this freight centre.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: Did Mr. Dunn discuss it with officers of the Victorian Railways at the meetings in the Wimmera?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Yes, and I was the only member of Parliament present at the meetings addressed by railways personnel at Hopetoun and Rupanyup.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: Did Mr. Dunn discuss it with a member of the Victorian Railways on that occasion?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Of course I did.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: That is contrary to what I was told.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: What should be made known is that, apart from the information that I have been putting forward, there has been no information forthcoming from the other members representing the area on the problems and the effects this rail freight centre will have. There has been deadly silence from the Government benches, but at last we are starting to hear some rumblings denoting that they are concerned.

The Hon. O. G. JENKINS: Is Mr. Dunn saying that the member for Lowan in another place has done nothing about it?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: If Mr. Jenkins likes to say that.

The Hon. O. G. JENKINS: I am asking you, Mr. Dunn; are you suggesting that by innuendo?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: I am saying that I have presented the facts of this case, and I have released to the public the questions I have asked and the information I have received. I can recall very little that has been released by other members directly concerned in the area.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: Again I ask: Did Mr. Dunn talk it over personally with the representatives of the Victorian Railways at these meetings?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: We have discussed this at length with Victorian Railways personnel at these meetings but they did not really answer the questions. They claimed I was trying to frustrate the introduction of this freight centre. I make it quite clear in this House, as I have in the area, that my main aim has been to let the people know whether their service will be cut or their stations will be closed and, if the stations are to be closed, whether the station masters will be transferred.

The Hon. D. G. ELLlOT: They are entitled to know that.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Exactly. The Hon. D. G. ELLloT: It sur

prises me that others did not worry or say anything.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: That is right. The Government is seeking to introduce this freight centre but has said little about it. It has been hard to ascertain from the Government just what is happening. This information should be made known to the people in the area as they are the ones who will be affected. As a matter of fact, at one of the farmers' meetings in the area it was suggested that they should tar and feather one of the speakers sent there to advise them and to send him on his way. That was strong language, but it was farmers' talk and showed their dissatisfaction with the replies they were receiving to their questions.


I hope the centre can operate successfully and that it will improve the service to the area. It has not been my aim to speak against the establishment of the centre but to present all the facts.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: It has been a funny way of going about it.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: It is better than doing nothing. One gets a little tired of smugness when projects are being introduced which affect people seriously, and to know that the views and rights of those affected are completely abused.

I have asked the Minister of Transport, the General Manager of the Victorian Railways and the Chairman of the Railways Board to visit the area and to put their views to the people, and to hear what the people have to say about the proposal. Unfortunately they believe there is no reason to visit the area as it would not serve any useful purpose because the people know what they are going to get. However, they do not.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: What did the officers who attended the meetings come up with?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: The personnel who came out to the area said they could answer questions on the operation of the freight centre but not on policy. We want to get to the policy makers in this situation. I will not go into more depth on it but I have indicated the areas of concern, and we are trying to improve what the railways are attempting to introduce.

Earlier I mentioned the quality of country water supplies and stated that in many cases it was poor. It is not fit to drink in many country towns and at certain times of the year it is unfit for women to wash their clothes in. There are many towns in that situation, and it is not good enough in this day and age.

It was for that reason that I questioned the Minister of Water Supply over the possible review of

the Government's formula for funding water supply improvements. I understand the formula has existed for 40 years, and it has proved to be inadequate in view of the high costs of water supply improvements and the fact that in many cases the cost is spread over a small number of ratepayers.

I cite Warracknabeal as an example. In round figures that town has a population of about 3,000, although the number of ratepayers would be less. The cost of improving the water supply is in the vicinity of $400,000, which is a lot of money to spread over those ratepayers. There are a number of other examples which indicate the load that ratepayers must bear. I was pleased to note that the answer given by the Minister of Water Supply indicates that the formula for funding country town water supplies is under review by the Water Commission and that details of the changes to the present policy will be forthcoming in the near future. I hope there can be an increase in the capital provision by the Government to assist in improving many of these inadequate water supplies.

I shall mention only briefly tonight, because there will be other occasions, a report which appeared in the Sun News-Pictorial of 28th April relating to deficiencies in education. The article quoted a report issued by the Australian Council for Education Research which involved a study of 14,000 ten-year-old and fourteen-year-old school children in all States. The summary of the report confirms for a lot of people the way they have been thinking for some time; that perhaps our education system is not achieving the effects which it should in view of the massive expenditure it is costing the people of this State.

With the high expenditure on education, with which a majority of people agree, we must have quality. If we have a problem in the future or a particular challenge to meet,


it is to look at our education system to see whether the children who are leaving our educational institutions today are better equipped than before to go out into the world to find employment and to live in the community.

The three cc Rs" have been talked about and I have spoken on it before. I believe our educational institutions have cc fallen down". The system has broken down because many of our children have been experimented with. My daughter is a case in point. When she was going to primary school she was one of a number of children who were experimented with in an open-class situation where the children went to school and were asked in the morning what they wanted to do that day. She was given a great deal of leeway, spelling was not considered necessary and very little attention was paid even to simple arithmetic. Many of those students, as they are now going on to further their education, are having tremendous difficulties, and this can easily be confirmed if honorable members talk to teachers, particularly of English, in many high schools who are now dealing with the products of the primary schools.

Some of the findings in the report were that up to 30 per cent of school children are unable to comprehend their text-books or any continuous piece of prose, such as the article I am referring to.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: The average is 15 per cent to 16 per cent in that category throughout the State.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: That is interesting. Another finding was that one in ten of all ten-year-olds cannot read even a simple sentence such as cc He is taller than his sister" . Another finding was that one in ten of the fourteen-year-olds cannot read a clock face; that 8 per cent cannot divide 56 by 7; and that, as a whole, these young Aus-

tralians are as ignorant of figures as pupils a year younger in the United States of America.

Further, only half the fourteenyear-olds are able to write an application for employment, and a quarter of the ten-year-olds cannot take a simple telephone message. It was found that children in the State school system perform worse than those in church schools, and that migrant children in Government, primary and high schools are worst of all.

The report offers no explanation for such findings except to indicate that generally they are in line with similar studies being released overseas. However, both locally and overseas, many experienced educators are convinced there is one main explanation-the turn-away from the three cc Rs".

The Hon. H. R. WARD: I heard that when I went to school.

The Hon. I. A. SWINBURNE: You have only to look at Mr. Ward to see the result!

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: I thank Mr. Swinburne for his assistance. I do not believe our children are exactly to blame; I believe it is the fault of our education system, which is costly and although extensive is not trying to improve the education of the child, which is the end product.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: They justify it by saying that the end product will be all right, but it is not all right.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: If honorable members ask anybody who has employed a person who has just left school--

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: Is it not the educationists who make the change?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: It is public money that is being spent.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: But it is the educationists who change the system.

Governor's Speech: [11 MAY, 1976.] Address-in-Rep/y. 729

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: They are not exactly right.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: It is you, Mr. Dunn, who is saying they are not right.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: I am saying there is certainly a deficiency in this regard. I have heard complaints from many parents in the area I represent about books in the libraries and also on the English text-book list which contain sections on explicit sex or text-books which indicate rebellion against parents and so on. This may be an attitude of the present times but it is becoming much more widespread. We need to keep our feet on the ground in respect of education. We need to understand that there are some basic elements with which people should be equipped and that these should be given to them in our schools.

The Hon. W. ,M. CAMPBELL: Money is not the main criterion in our schools.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Of course not. The people's money is being spent on education and they should have a bigger say in what their children are being taught and the way the education system is turning.

The Hon. H. R. WARD : Not more than 5 per cent of the people take an interest.

The Hon. B. p. DUNN: Do not bet on it. A growing number of people in Victoria are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the education system. As Mr. Wright says, there are excellent examples where the people have assisted. Rainbow, in the North-Western Province, is one town where the parents through support, assistance and encouragement have turned the high school into a magnificent place. The students are proud of the school; they are proud to be there and to be part of the community.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: Do the parents use the assembly hall to get together?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN : Yes. I refer to the lack of travelling allowances for special services in education, such as audio-visual services, library services, physical education advisers and special education unit personnel. In the country most of these teachers travel to various schools throughout the year, and in most cases their travelling expenses are inadequate. This restricts their activities, and invariably before the end of the financial year their allowance has been used and their services stop.

The Hon. I. B. TRA YLING: What about the push bike?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Mr. Trayling should take his push bike t'O Mildura and ride it to Rainbow. He will find out why a push bike would not be of use to him because of the grea t distance involved.

Finally, I refer to the growing alarm in the country and throughout the State at the deterioration in the road network. One shire informed me today that it was in such a position that it felt it would have to consider drawing up a list of roads it would have to let revert from bitumen to gravel surface because they could not be maintained. There are tremendous needs in roads. The Municipal Association of Victoria has put out excellent details which show that the Government's contributions for road works in Australia and in Victoria have fallen way behind the needs because 'Of inflation. It states that increased expenditure, particularly from the Comm'Onwealth Government, will be necessary to overcome this situation. The association's plan was for a contributi'On of 50 per cent from the Commonwealth, 35 per cent from the State and 15 per cent from local government. Councils are being asked to accept a much greater responsibility than was originally intended in the provision of a whole

730 Adjournment. [COUNCIL.] Questions on Notice.

range of other services. If they are expected to continue on their present rating system, Governments will have to give them more support f.or costly facilities such as road surfaces. I hope more attention will be given tQ that aspect.

I support the suggestion put forward by Mr. Grimwade that it is time the Government completely abolished probate duty in this State. It is an unfair tax and a double tax. A person is taxed on the income with which he pays for his assets, and when he dies he is taxed again.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: If you want a Government to spend extra money, and at the same time to cut down on millions of dollars in revenue, where will the money come from?

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Where does the Government get the money to sink into the underground rail loop? I know Government supporters would like to live that -one down. If the Government can find money for such projects surely money is available for some of the necessary items I have raised in this debate tonight. Probate duty should be abolished. I am glad the Government is taking a step in that direction and I hope it may be achieved in the near future. Once again I compliment the Governor on his activities and the way in which he carries out his duties in Victoria.

On the motion of the Hon. D. G. ELLIOT (Melbourne Province), the debate was adjourned.


ADJOURNMENT.

The Hon. A. J. HUNT (Minister for Local Government): By leave, I move-

That the Council, at its rising, adjourn until tomorrow, at a quarter-past two o'clock.


The House adjourned at 11.8 p.m.


PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN NORTHWESTERN PROVINCE.

(Question No. 19)

The Hon. K. I. WRIGHT (NorthWestern Province) asked the Chief Secretary, for the Minister of Education-

How many State primary schools are there in the North-Western Province, stating-(i) where each is situated; and (ii) the number of pupils and teachers at each?

The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary): The answer supplied by the Minister of Education is highly statistical, and I seek leave to have it incorpora ted in Hansard-

Leave was granted, and the answer was as follows-

Name

3104 Antwerp .. 349S Appin South 2314 Areegra 17S3 Banyena .. 4188 Banyena South 32S0 Berriwillock 3109 Beulah 419S Beverford .. 2602 Birchip 3800 Boinka 2170 Boolite 1692 Boort 2431 Borung .. 3749 Boundary Bend 384S Brim .. 8093 Brim East .. 5933 Burrum .. 3742 Cardross .. 9264 Carwarp .. 7663 Castle Donnington .. 482S Charlton .. 4907 ChiUingollah Consolidated Cohuna 3962 Cokum Reserve 1340 Colignan .. 3146 Culaoa .. 7214 Dimboola .. 8627 DinawaU .. 178S Donald 1492 Dooen .. 3241 Fernihurst .. 4018 Fish Point .. 2318 Gerang .. Consolidated Goroke 0696 Goschen .. 2627 Gowanford .. 1671 Hopetoun .. 2998 Horsham .. 4226 Horsham North 4697 Horsham West 3174 Irymple .. 3702 lrymple South 2988 Jeparit 1728 Jung 1840 Kalkee .. Consolidated Kaniva 4S88 Katyj) .. 3221 Kenmare .. 1410 Kerang .. 4949 Kerang South 2116 KeweU .. 4130 Kooloonong 226S Koondrook .. 3470 Koorlong .. 1800 Korong Vale 220S Koroop 1799 Laen

Pupils

17 20 12 17 •

61 117 63

137 13 11

235 IS 28 40 10 13

174 16 39

168 •

S60 12 49 44

227 10

226 26 12 11 8

230 9

10 188 448 481 542 311 127 85 21 11

274 10 8

428 IS2

IS 13 97 32 4S •

16

Teachers

3 4 3 6 1 1

12 I 3 2 1 1 6 1 2

10

23 I 3 2

12 1

13 2 1 1 I

IS 1 1

10 24 20 25 13 6 4 1 1

12 I 1

22 8 1 1 4 2 2

Questions

Name

3278 Lake Boga .. 2122 Lake Charm 2879 Lake Hindmarsh 3564 Lake Heran 2990 Lalbert .. 1686 Lallat Plains 3511 Lascelles 2087 Leitchville 3089 Litchfield 2590 Lorquon 2494 Lubeck 2909 Macorna . . . . Consolidated Manangatang 1554 Marnoo 3745 Mead 3761 Meatian .. 3464 Meatian West 3687 Merbein .. 3780 Merbein South 3996 Merbein West 4357 Meringur .. 2915 Mildura .. 4389 Mildura South 3983 Mildura West 3628 Mincha 1931 Mincha West 2167 Minyip 2498 Mitre 4000 Mittyack .. 2344 Murra Warra 3859 Murrabit .. 4119 Murrawee .. 3797 Murraydale.. . . Consolidated MurrayviIle .. 1549 Murtoa 3271 Myall .. 3366 Mystic Park 3927 Nandaly 4184 Nangiloc 1548 Natimuk 2651 Netherby 2411 Nhill .. 3163 Nichols Point 4189 NormanviIIe 3301 NulIawil 3263 Nyah .. 3922 Nyah West .. 3615 Duyen .. 3973 Patchewollock 40Q I Perenna 4164 Piangil 1439 Pimpinio 4278 Pira .. 1712 Pyramid Hill 2443 Quambatook 3194 Quantong .. 3313 Rainbow .. 4057 Red Cliffs .. 4123 Red Cliffs East Consolidated Robinvale .. 1595 Rupanyup .. 3872 Rupanyup South 3273 Sea Lake .. 1934 Sheep HiIls .. 3861 Speed 4200 Speewa .. 1646 St. Arnaud .. 453 I Stewart .. 4416 Sunny Cliffs 1142 Swan Hill .. 4743 Swan Hill North 3000 Tarranyurk .. 2486 Teal Point .. 2865 Teddywaddy West 3654 Tempy .. 3581 The Lake 2227 Tragowel 3868 Tresco 3735 Turriff 3795 Tyntynder .. 3168 Tyntynder South 3426 Ultima .. 3819 Underbool .. 4150 Vinifera 3568 Waitchie .. 2698 Wallaloo East 3747 Walpeup .. 1334 Warracknabeal 3224 Watchem .. 3380 Watchupga ..

794 Wedderbum Consolidated Werrimull 4010 Wilkur South

[11 MAY, 1976.] on Notice. 731

Pupils Teachers

123 38 22 11 54 28 13

113 7

14 15 15

122/88 65 32 10 •

295 72 96 51

860 303 528

8 14

137 11 7

17 81 • 8

127 146

12 10 24 S9

107 32

356 134

10 36 81

141 226

73 7

100 23 33

92/88 133 SO

161 338

86 501

78 7

190 14 17 35

340 85 67

478 519

20 7 •

31 106

12 57 11 25 41 81 63 40 •

11 38

303 65 •

149 90.170

7

5 2 2 I 2 2 1 5 1 1 1 1 7 3 2 1

14 3 4 3

42 13 20

1 1 8 1 t 1 4

1 5 5 t 1 1 3 5 2

16 6 1 2 3 5

12 3·5 1 4 t 2 8 5 2 7

15 3

22 4 1

11 1 1 2

15 3 3

26 25

I 1

1 5 1 2 1 1 2 3 3 2

1 2

16 3

6 11

1

Name

4598 Willangie .. 2632 Willenabrina 3373 Woomelang .. 2246 Woorak .. 3945 Woorinen .. 4148 Woorinen North 4456 Woorinen South 1757 Wycheproof 3976 Yaapeet 2886 Yanac

Pupils Teachers

12 14 96 28 SO 28 56

189 20 16

1 1 4 1 2 1 2 8 1 1

• Not sufficient number of children ; the school is temporarily closed.

TRAVELLING EXPENSES FOR TEACHERS.

(Question No. 31) The Hon. B. P. DUNN (North

Western Province) asked the Chief Secretary, for the Minister of Education-

(a) On what basis are travelling expenses allocated for special service teachers and advisers?

(b) Is the Minister of Education aware that inadequate travelling expenses are severely limiting the regular provision of special services to schools in country areas?

(c) Will the Government provide sufficient expenses to allow these important services to be fully effective?

The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary): The answer supplied by the Minister of Education is-

(a) The provision of funds for travelling expenses for special services staff is firstly based upon the figures presented bv the particular service in their submission of draft estimates for the financial year.

The subsequent allocation is then based upon the provision of funds by Parlia ment in the annual Appropriation Act and the demands of the particular service.

(b) and (c) The regular proVISion of special services to schools and groups in country areas is not at present limited bv inadequate funds. Services are proceeding normally. Additional funds for this purpose were made available in February last.

SCHOOL MEDICAL SERVICE. (Question No. 46)

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT (Melbourne Province) asked the Minister of Health-

(a) What are the responsibilities of the School Medical Service?

(b) Do the responsibilities include the detection and treatment of pediculosis; if not, why?

(c) What schools has the service visited during the past year?

(d) What, in the main, have school visits medically revealed?

732 Questions [COUNCIL.] on Notice.

The Hon. W. V. HOUGH TON (Minister of Health): The answer is-

1. The assessment of the health of school aged children in order to:

(i) Identify those children with conditions which may adversely affect their future health and education.

(ii) Arrange for the management or referral of those children requiring medical treatment.

(ill) Ascertain together with teachers and other professional officers the special educational needs of certain groups of children such as the visually, auditorily and neurologically handicapped.

(iv) Such health education as is necessary to enable teachers and parents to understand and provide for the needs of children.

2. To supervise the health of teachers and conduct medical examinations required by the Superannuation Board.

(b) School n,edical staff have always given assistance and advice when head lice was suspected or detected in schools. As a result of the rising incidence of pediculosis, five new nursing positions were created in 1973. These nurses have been working full time in schools and with families at home when necessary. Other school medical staff are involved where they encounter pediculosis or other infestations in the course of their duties in schools.

The school medical staff is not at present empowered to act as a general therapeutic service for the school population and does not have the facilities to assume this role. To disrupt its primary programme by withdrawing staff to deal with outbreaks whenever they occur is unjustified as other facilities already exist in the community.

Responsibility for control of infectious diseases and related nuisances rests largely with municipalities, all of which have public health staff. Treatment is the responsibility of therapeutic services constituted for that purpose--infectious diseases and general hospitals, special clinics and the private medical sector. All members of the community have a responsibility for the maintenance of personal health and hygiene.

(c) The School Medical Service in 1975 visited 90 per cent of country schools, and approximately 55 per cent of metropolitan schools, the emphasis being placed on services to primary, state and registered parochial schools in the metropolitan area.

(d) Approximately 15 per cent of children examined are found to need attention. Of these, 50 per cent have visual refractive errors, 10 per cent have speech problems, 10 per cent behaviourial problems, 5 per cent learning difficulties, and the remainder, conditions of the skin, infections of the ear, nose and throat and postural and nutritional conditions such as obesity.

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT PRIORITY REVIEW COMMITTEE.

(Question No. 51) The Hon. K. I. WRIGHT (North

Western Province) asked the Chief Secretary, for the Minister of Education-

Who are the members of the Priority Review Committee for the Bendigo and Horsham regions, respectively, listing their addresses and occupations?

The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary): The answer supplied by the Minister of Education is highly statistical, and I seek leave to have it incorporated in Hansard.


MEMBERS OF THE PRIORITY REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR THE HORSHAM REGION.

Name

Mr. J. Bishop Mr. J. Stevenson Mr. M. Palmer Mr. H. Mi11er Mr. M. Whiting Mrs. J. Bennett Mr. V. Gough Mr. N. Silvey Mr. B. Sharrock Mr. R. Shepherd Mrs. P. Gebhardt Mr. A. Rickard Mr. F. Rogers Mr. E. Kent Mr. G. Lovell Mr. R. Walker

Oc:cupation

R.D.E. Inspector of Secondary Schools Principal Teacher Horticulturalist Primary producer Inspector of Technical Schools Principal Teacher Shop owner Home duties Inspector of Primary Schools Principal Principal Health Inspector Farmer

Horsham Head Office

Address

Warracknabeal High School Nhill High School P.O. Box 52, Merbein P.O. Box 47, Nhill Head Office Horsham Technical School Irymple Technical School 92 Dooen Road, Horsham C/o. Irymple Technical School P.O. Box 346, Horsham Horsham West Primary School Dimboola Primary School Shire Offices, Warracknabeal .. Pleasant Park", Goroke


Name Occupation Address

Principal Principal

Irymple South Primary School Redcliffs Primary School

Mr. 1. Fitzgibbon Mr. J. Murfitt Mr. T. Sires Mrs. M. Blake Mr. 1. Carr Mr. B. Leak

Primary producer Home duties Administrative officer Administrative officer

P.O. Box 212, Red Cliffs P.O. Box 16, Irymple Horsham Horsham

MEMBERS OF THE PRIORITY REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR THE BENDIGO REGION.

Name Occupation Address

Mr. W. Bainbridge Regional Director of Education P.O. Box 442, Bendigo Mr. P. Lougoon Administrative officer P.O. Box 442, Bendigo Mr. W. Clarke Superintendent of Maintenance P.W.D., Hargreaves Street,

Bendigo Mr. F. O'Shannessy .. Regional Architect P.W.D., Hargreaves Street,

Bendigo Mrs. J. EJIiott Home duties R.S.D., Tongala Mr. J. Lannen Principal Cohuna High School Mrs. J. Torpey Home duties Corner Nish and Neale Streets,

Mr. M. Power Teacher Bendigo

Comet Hill Primary School Mr. A. Lamboume .. Shire Engineer Shire Offices, Donald Mr. L. Casey Teacher Sea Lake High School Mrs. E. Sisson Home duties 118 LyttIeton Street, Castlemaine Mr. G. Rabie Teacher Castlemaine Teachnical Co))ege Mr. N. Webb Inspector of Secondary Schools Head Office Mr. R. Qualtrough .. Inspector of Technical Schools Head Office Mrs. C. Conroy Principal

LAKE EILDON. (Question No. 54)

The Hon. J. M. WALTON (Melbourne North Province) asked the Minister of Water Supply-

Has he been able to accede to the request of persons affected by floods from the Eildon weir by-(i) putting back the filling date to either 15th or 30th October, 1976; and (ii) increasing the freeboard by filling the weir to only 948 feet?

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER (Minister of Water Supply): The answer is-

The Minister of Water Supply requested the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission to consider a later filling datenamely 15th October. The commission will keep this request in mind during the filling period.

Evidence is currently being prepared by the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission for presentation to the Public Works Committee, which is at present inquiring into northern Victorian water resources and their allocation. The next phase of evidence, which I understand will be presented shortly, will include information on the extent of flood mitigation capable of being achieved by the operation

Kalianna Special School

of water conservation works and the consequences of alternative operating procedures. I expect that following this evidence, other interested groups might also present their case to the committee, particularly it they have proposals to change the operating rules of storages for the purpose of additional flood mitigation.

The Water Commission advises me that at present the volume held in Lake Eildon is 120,000 megalitres less than at the start of the 1967-68 drought and nearly 200,000 megalitres less than the volume held at the start of the 1972-73 drought. I therefore believe it would be unwise at this stage to alter operating rules since such alteration might further prejudice the changes of filling Eildon later this year. On the basis of the previous records there is a 35 per cent probability that Eildon would not fill by 1st October this year.

In view of the importance of managing water conservation works to ensure that water is available through extended dry periods, I do not believe that any change in current operating procedures should be made without the fullest examination and consideration of all the consequences. The most suitable forum for this to be achieved is the present Public Works Committee of inquiry.


FUNDS FOR WATER TRUSTS. (Question No. 57)

The Hon. B. P. DUNN (NorthWestern Province) asked the Minister of Water Supply-

(a) What are the details of the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission formula for funding water trusts to improve the quality and quantity of supplies under their control?

(b) Is he aware of difficulties faced by small country towns in meeting the high cost of improvements to their supply?

(c) Will the Government review and adjust its funding formula to provide a greater percentage of Government funds in improvement works?

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER (Minister of Water Supply): The answer is-

(a) Government loan funds and privately borrowed loan funds ·are provided for meeting the capital cost of works constructed by country water supply authorities. The Government loan funds are made available at 3 per cent interest and all private loan funds are subsidized back to 3 per cent.

Capital grants towards the cost of all water supply works are made available by the Government in accordance with a formula of State-wide application which takes into account such items as capital cost of the complete scheme, size of the town, current wage levels, the purchase price of water from other authorities and the degree of pumping required.

In the case of the provision of a water supply to a town not previously served and where the required water rate would exceed 17· 5 cents in the net annual value, additional assistance may be provided by the Government by deferring (in accordance with ·a set scale) the interest and redemption payments on Government loans.

(b) Yes. (c) Financial assistance to country town

water supplies is under review by the Water Commission at the present time and details concerning possible changes to present policy will be available for consideration by the Government in the near future.

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS. (Question No. 58)

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL (East Yarra Province) asked the Minister of Health-

In respect of the years 1972-73, 1973-74, 1974-75, and 1975-76 (to date)-(i) how many registered medical practitioners were there in Victoria; (ii) how many of these practitioners held specialist status; and (iii) how many practitioners were refused specialist status?

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health): As the answer is statistical, I suggest that, by leave of the HouS'e, it be incorporated in Hansard without my reading it.

Leave was granted, and the answer was as follcws-

1. 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 (to date)

5,988 6,387 6,577 6,913

2. 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76

3. 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76

(to date)

(to date)

942 1,027 1,069 1,100

75 47 25 26

DENTISTS. (Question No. 60)

The Hon. B. P. DUNN (NorthWestern Province) asked the Minister of Health-

( a) Is he aware that the dentist to population ratio in country Victoria is 1 : 5402, and in the metropolitan area 1 : 2469?

(b) What number of dental students are at present in training?

( c) What ,action is proposed by the Government to overcome the severe shortage of dentists in the country?

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health): The answer is-

(a) Yes. (b) There are 239 undergraduates at

present in the Faculty of Dentistry, University of Melbourne.

(c) The shortage of dentists in country areas is being overcome by the establishment of regional dental clinics in base and district hospitals. Clinics lare also being established in country community health centres.

KOROROIT CREEK. (Question No. 61)

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT (Melbourne West Province) asked the Minister for Local Government, for the Minister for Conservation-

(a) Further to question No. 621, asked in this House on 27th November, 1975, from what licensed discharge points are the following contaminants being dischargedcyanide, phenol, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, mercury and tin?

(b) What action has been taken to have these discharges stopped?


The Hon. A. J. HUNT (Minister for Local Government) : The answer supplied by the Minister for Conservation is lengthy and, in part, tabular in nature. I ask leave for its incorporation in Hansard.


(a) The following table indicates the licence discharge points for cyanide, phenol, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, mercury and tin-

Company Name CN Pn~- Cr Cu Pb Ni Hg Sn

now Chemical .. Aust. Carbon Black Aust. Synthetic

Rubber .. Petroleum Refineries

P/L. .. .. Altona Petro-

Chemcial Co. . . [Cl Aust. Ltd. . . Parker Electro. Co.

* *

* * * *

*Indicates discharge of this component.

(b) Action taken in relation to these discharges has been in the form of the issue of licences in accordance with the requirements of section 20 of the Environment Protection Act 1970. These licences ensure that any components of the wastes when discharged to the environment are at a level which does not create a condition of pollution to the environment.

Under the conditions of these licences two companies, Parker Electroplating Company and LC.!. Australia Ltd., were required to effect certain improvements to their respective operations. As a result of these requirements Parker Electroplating Company has ceased discharging to the environment and LC.!. Australia Ltd. is installing specialized plant to enable all wastes from the company's chemical complex at Deer Park to be directed to the sewerage system.

STATE OFFICES FOR MILDURA. (Question No. 62)

The Hon. K. I. WRIGHT (NorthWestern Province) asked the Minister for State Development and De~ centralization, for the Minister of Public Works-

With regard to the Minister of Public Works's recent press release announcing new State offices for Geelong and MHdura-

(a) Where will the Mildura offices be erected?

(b) When does he expect building to commence?

(c) What is the proposed floor area ot the building?

( d) Will the announced allocation of $500,000 be adequate to erect a building large enough to house the many Government departments in the region, in comparison with $8 million allocated to Geelong?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister for State Development and Decentralization): The answer supplied by the Minister of Public Works is-

Negotiations are proceeding with an in· vestment company to purchase an office block for State public office purposes which the company proposes to erect on a site at the corner of Eleventh Street and Lang~ tree Parade, Mildura, subject to satisfac. tory price agreement.

An analysis of present and future accommodation needs at Mildura has indicated that the proposed new building of some 19,000 square feet will be adequate in area to house the various Government departments located at or to be located at this centre.

It is currently expected that the erection of the new building could commence immediately negotiations are finalized and financial authority is obtained to enable contract documentation to be completed.

COUNCIL ELECTIONS FOR KEILOR.

(Question No. 66) The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH (Doutta

Galla Province) asked the Minister for Local Government-

Further to the answer to question No. 42, asked in this House on 4th May, 1976, that is was intended that elections for the Keilor City Council should take place this year-

(a) Is he aware that this information was released in the Keilor Messenger in the final week of the State election campaign by the Liberal candidate for the Keilor electoral district?

(b) When, and in what form, will the information be officially advised to the administrator now conducting the affairs of the City of Keilor?

The HOD. A. J. HUNT (Minister for Local Government): The answer is-

(a) I have seen the issue of the Keilor Messenger referred to.

(b) I have discussed the objective stated in the answer to question No. 42, together with the reasons both for and against it, with Commissioner Holland on a number of occasions during recent months. I have also discussed the issue inter alia with the Liberal candidate for Niddrie prior to the State elections and with the member for Niddrie and the town clerk since. The commissioner informs me that he needs no further advice at this stage.


1Jlrgtlllattur Assrmbly. Tuesday, May 11, 1976.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler) took the chair at 4.3 p.m., and read the prayer.

ABSENCE OF MINISTER. The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth

Wheeler): I advise the House that the Premier and Treasurer is unable to be present in the House today.


MOTOR CAR THIRD-PARTY INSURANCE.

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition): Can the Deputy Premier confirm to the House that a statement appeared in the press indicating that the Government has decided to reject the recommendations of the Premiums Comlnittee on increases in third-party insurance? Is the Government also proposing to hold yet another inquiry into aspects of insurance premiums and thirdparty insurance rates and, if so, can the Deputy Premier inform the House whether the inquiry will be an all-party Parliamentary inquiry or a Government inquiry? Can he also inform the House generally of the composition of the body that will be working on such an inquiry and the terms of reference of the inquiry?

Mr. THOMPSON (Deputy Premier): It is correct that the Government has rejected the recommendations received from the Premiums Committee, which is set up under the Motor Car Act, and that it does intend to hold an independent inquiry, the details of which will be announced probably later this week.

Generally speaking, the purpose of the independent inquiry is to inquire into the effect of such factors as the no-fault liability scheme, Medibank, and on the costs of third-party insurance in Victoria. Also it will ascer-

tain whether rates in other States are lower than those in Victoria and, if so, why they are lower than in Victoria. The person, or persons to conduct the inquiry will be named at an early date.

SUBSIDY FOR DESTROYED CATTLE.

Mr. WOOD (Swan Hill): In view of the statement in today's paper, will the Minister of Agriculture give details of the subsidy available to farmers who slaughter cattle?

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture): The Government has decided today to make available to farmers a subsidy of $5 per head for those cattle which farmers slaughter because they are uneconomic to keep or to market. The criterion is that the cattle must be killed under the control and supervision of the municipality where the stock will be assembled. If necessary assistance will be available from the Department of Agriculture. A condition is that the municipality shall make a charge of up to 50 cents, but no more, to the farmer. Therefore where the municipality charges 50 cents, the farmer will net $4.50 a head out of the operation.

The grant or subsidy will apply as from last Sunday evening which means that the people in the Shire of Deakin, in which the township of Tongala is situated, will be eligible for this subsidy. The subsidy will apply up to and until 30th June. The reason for that is that the Government wishes to encourage farmers to dispose of stock which are uneconomic and which they should not carry through the winter as quickly as possible.

FAWKNER EDUCATION DEMONSTRATION CENTRE.

Mr. WILTON (Broadmeadows): Can the Minister of Education inform the House why the Fawkner Education Demonstration Centre has received only $5,000 of the $30,000 establishment grant and when the centre will


receive the outstanding $25,000, as that centre is at present unable to fulfil its function?

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education): It has not been brought to my attention that the centre has received only portion of the establishment grant. I will make inquiries to ascertain the reason why and advise the honorable member accordingly.

REGENT THEATRE.

Mr. ROSS-EDWARDS (Leader of the National Party): Can the Deputy Premier advise the House whether the Victorian Government has entered into any agreement with the Melbourne City Council to advance the council money to repair the Regent Theatre?

Mr. THOMPSON (Deputy Premier): I am not familiar with any detailed negotiations that have taken place with the Melbourne City Council. These discussions concerning the Regent Theatre have taken place directly with the Premier himself, and I would not be in a position to give any details of the discussion or any agreements formally made.

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF FOR FARMERS.

Mr. LIEBERMAN (Benambra): Has the Minister of Agriculture sought recognition from the Commonwealth Government for the need to provide farmers with unemployment relief and, if so, what progress has been made in persuading the Commonwealth Government to adopt criteria that are more realistic?

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture): I thank the honorable member for Benambra for that question. As the House will know, we have been urging the Federal Government to come to the rescue with social security benefits for farmers who have a small or negative income. We have also made available on an individual basis carry-on finance. For the benefit of honorable members, I should like to table a telex I have just received which outlines the Commonwealth agreement to allow farmers to

be now eligible for social security payments, provided that they make themselves available for employment. The further aspect of household support is covered in the telex, which honorable members can study.

EASTERN END OF COLUNS STREET.

Mr. JONES (Melbourne): In the absence of the Minister for Planning, I direct a question to the Deputy Premier. Has the Government received representations from Mr. Rodney Davidson, the Chairman of the National Trust of Victoria, to the effect that the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works and the Melbourne City Council have been dithering in their failure to use their powers to preserve the "Plaster of Paris end" of Collins Street? If there has been such a representation, will the Government ensure that the Melbourne City Council uses its power under the Town and Country Planning Act to preserve areas of architectural, historic and scientific interest? If not, why not?

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education): Although the Government certainly is interested in the preservation of the character of the eastern end of Collins Street, I know of no representations that have been made on this subject by Mr. Davidson. However, they could have been made by him directly to the Premier.

DROUGHT RELIEF. Mr. STEPHEN (Ballarat South):

Will the Minister of Lands cause to have issued a full list of subsidies and benefits available to primary producers in localities that have been declared as approved drought-affected areas?

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister of Lands) : The document that the honorable member seeks is currently being prepared. For the general information of honorable members, on the subject of the drought, I am writing to interested groups seeking their nominations for the re-establishment


of the drought advisory committee that was first instigated by Sir William McDonald in 1967-68 and reintroduced by myself in 1971-72.

OIL EXPLORATION LEASES.

Mr. AMOS (Morwell): Following the question directed to the Minister for Fuel and Power by the Leader of the Opposition last week concerning oil exploration leases in Bass Strait, can the Minister indicate to the House whether it is a fact that oil exploration leases in Bass Strait have been relinquished? If so, how many, and when is it likely that such leases will be advertised in the Government Gazette?

Mr. BALFOUR (Minister for Fuel and Power): Some areas have been relinquished. I cannot recall the actual number of blocks, but I will advise the honorable member. Some blocks have been advertised, and some have not.

EARTHQUAKE IN ITALY.

Mr. LACY (Warrandyte): I direct a question to the Minister of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs regarding the facilities of the community services centre in Collins Street which the Government has made available to the Italian community following the earthquake disaster in northern Italy. Can the Minister inform the House of the extent to which the Italian community has been able to make use of these facilities and whether the Government will consider developing them so that the centre can fulfil its role when similar overseas disasters affect the ethnic communities in the State?

Mr. JONA (Minister of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs): I appreciate the great interest of the Opposition members who are interjecting in this tragic affair which has taken place in northern Italy. It is true that the community services centre which comes within the jurisdiction of the Premier was made available by the Premier and on his initiative for the purpose of assisting in co-ordinating

arrangements existing between the Department of Foreign Affairs, the State Government, the Italian Consulate-General and various organizations within the Italian community. The purpose was to enable members of the Italian community to be kept fully informed about the tragedy in the Italian Alps and more particularly to make available to those of its members who have relatives in the area the latest casualty lists which are being cabled to the Department of Foreign Affairs in Canberra.

The community services centre was opened at 9 a.m. on Sunday to provide this service. It was made available through the co-operation of members of the Italian community and the professional staff of the centre, including interpreters, all of whom gave their services voluntarily. The centre dealt with more than 320 inquiries. It also acted as a main source of information to the Australian Red Cross.

I am sure that the suggestion of the honorable member for Warrandyte, that the community services centre might be used in similar ways in similar circumstances in the future, will be sympathetically received by the Premier.

Mr. WILKES (Northcote): In order to test the sincerity of the Government I ask the Minister of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs whether he or his Government has made representations to the Federal Government to arrange for the passage to Australia of refugees from U dine and other places affected by the earthquake in Italy who may wish to settle in Victoria, as was done for Cambodians and other people.

Mr. JONA (Minister of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs): Yesterday morning the Premier sent a telegram to the Prime Minister requesting the Federal Government to give immediate consideration to the course of action suggested in the question. At the same time I had discussions with the Federal Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs. I urged him to


give particular consideration to the cases of relatives of people living in Victoria. I asked that action be taken particularly to expedite any arrangements with respect to those applications which are currently pending. There are a number of people living in the earthquake area who are being sponsored by relatives living here. The Government has asked that these applications be given absolute priority.

Of the quota of 2,500 Italians to come to Australia, which was set by the Federal Government for 1975-76, some 1,400 have arrived and 1,100 are yet to come. It is to be hoped, at least in respect of that outstanding quota, that Italians living in the earthquake-affected area who are relatives of Italians living in Victoria should have every opportunity of coming to Australia on compassionate grounds.

GRANTS FOR KINDERGARTEN TEACHERS.

Mr. SKEGGS (Ivanhoe): I ask the Minister of Education whether, in view of the fact that primary and secondary teachers undertaking inservice courses at the State College of Victoria receive Government grants, he will consider recommending similar grants for kindergarten teachers at the Institute of Early Childhood Development. Is it a fact that the Interim Committee of the Children's Commission is actually considering a grant to the Advisory Committee on Early Childhood Development?

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education): Perhaps this matter should properly be directed to the Assistant Minister of Health but, in so far as it refers to the Education Department, it is true that those who attend the State College of Victoria or universities and intend to be teachers are paid studentship or scholarship allowances and there is also a generous system of leave and allowances in the in-service training field.

At present the Government is endeavouring to place increasing emphasis on the pre-school area. Victoria is, to some extent, ahead of the rest of Australia in the preschool field but in many areas there is still a shortage of kindergardens and pre-school centres to cater for those who wish to attend them. The big question is whether the same system of training and allowances, together with the same inservice training scheme, should be applied in this field as has operated in the teaching area generally in the past. The latter matter is, I believe, under consideration by the Commonwealth Government and the Children's Commission at the moment, and no final decision has been made.

HUME FREEWAY. Mr. TREWlN (Benalla): Can the

Minister of Transport inform the House whether it is expected that an emergency telephone service will be installed along the Hume Freeway? Furthermore, will the Minister ascertain whether the Country Roads Board or any other department with the necessary qualifications can research the need for fogwarning signals on the freeway, particularly as it extends through high regions of the State which are fog prone?

Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport): I read the report in the press to which the honorable member refers. I am not able to give him specific information at the moment. I have sought the information from the department. As soon as it is available, I will let the honorable member know.

HIT-RUN FATALITY. Mr. CRABB (Knox): I direct my

question to the Minister of Special Education, on behalf of the Chief Secretary. With reference to the particularly serious hit-run accident which occurred in Wellington Road, Mulgrave, last Saturday afternoon and re sui ted in the tragic death of Mr. Gerald Ladiges, who was the


father of five children and a constituent of mine, what progress has been made by the police in apprehending the driver of the vehicle, and what public 'assistance has been requested and given?

Mr. SCAN,LAN (Minister of Special Education): The accident was indeed serious, as indeed were the circumstances surrounding it. I understand that a person has been apprehended and is being interrogated at present. Accordingly, it is not my intention to make any further comment on the matter.

YOUTH CONFERENCE.

Ma-s. PATRICK (Brighton): I address my question without notice to the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation: What was the youth conference that was opened by the Premier yesterday and what was it trying to achieve?

Mr. DIXON (Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation): The conference which was opened by the Premier was" Youth 2006".

Mr. FORD HAM : We had "Youth 2005" last year; where does the money come from?

Mr. DIXON: That is right. The money comes from the Department of Youth, Sport and Recreation and it is probably the most stimulating and innovative youth programme in Australia. The conference is taking place at the La Trobe University and its aims are to enable young people from all walks of life, and from all political activities and places, to get together to ask themselves questions about the future and to communicate with political leaders and public servants in Victoria. To that end, any member from this House who would like to visit La Trobe University and play a part in "Youth 2006" is welcome.

BOXING. Mr. TREZISE (Geelong North) : As

the Department of Youth, Sport and Recrea tion refuses permission for a person under the age of eighteen

years to engage in professional boxing matches in this State, presumably because they are not considered fit or mature enough to take punishment, is the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation aware that persons aged from ten years to eighteen years box under the same conditions in an amateur ring? Can the Minister explain why the department will allow these younger persons to absorb punishment in an amateur ring, particularly when a person is aged seventeen and is engaged in threeround bouts, but a professional has to be eighteen years before he can engage in three-round bouts? Can the Minister explain the attitude of the department and the reason for adopting different attitudes to persons engaged in amateur and professional boxing?

Mr. DIXON (Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation): The department has seen fit to legislate within the area of professional boxing. In amateur boxing it is considered that the Victorian Amateur Boxing Association is able to make certain that all the health measures and so on which are considered essential are carried out. There is a distinct difference between boxing to improve one's method of self-defence in one's advancement as an individual and boxing to earn money.

The body which advised the department, and which was set up by the Federal Government, stated that any legislation should limit professional boxing to a minimum age of eighteen years. I believe the points raised by the honorablemember would be thought of very much by the Victorian Amateur Boxing Association, which would do its best to ensure that in bouts conducted between youthful individuals there would not be much likelihood of physical injury. However, there is room-this is certainly importantfor eternal vigilance to be exercised in this area for the reasons expounded by the honorable member for Geelong North.


"WALTZING MATILDA."

Mr. LIND (Dandenong): Is the Minister of Education aware that recently an American news commentator referred to the man characterized in Waltzing Matilda as a sheep-stealing hobo and, if he is aware of this, will he ask Mr. Fraser to see whether there would be any reflection on the athletes during the next Olympic Games if Waltzing Matilda is chosen as the anthem?

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): Order! I do not believe this is a question which comes under Government administration.


Mr. BIRRELL (Geelong West): Referring to the question asked earlier on the problems of motor car third-party insurance premiums, at the next inquiry can the Minister of Education ensure that an investigation will be made as to the sustenance 'and income provision which originally was set at $160 but since has been raised to $240, because of the substantial rises reflected recently? Will the honorable gentleman look at this level with the idea of cutting it down substantially as a main aim in cutting insurance premiums?

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education): The terms of reference will be relatively broad ones. They have not been determined precisely at this stage but it could well be that they will be in sufficiently broad terms to encompass the type of suggestion put forward by the honorable member for Geelong West. One purpose of having the inquiry is to bring into the open for independent investigation the various suggestions which have come forward in recent weeks following the recommendation of the Premiums Committee, and 'also to investigate the complaints which have come forward.

IDGHER SCHOOL CERTIFICATE FEES.,

Mr. FORDHAM (Footscray): Can the Minister of Education confirm that the Government has at last accepted the need to abolish higher school certificate fees in Victoria and that students undertaking that course of studies this year will not be required to pay such fees?

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education) : We are at present discussing with representatives of the Victorian Universities and Schools Examination Board and Treasury officials the amount of money which would be required to eliminate fees for this year's examination. At this stage I can say that it will no longer be necessary for students to pay fees and the scheme will operate from the commencement of the 1976 examination year.

YOUTH CONFERENCE.

Mr. FRANCIS (Caulfield): Further to the question asked by the honorable member for Brighton I ask the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation whether the youth conference which was publicized yesterday was sponsored by or connected with the National Youth Council of Australia, which has its headquarters in Clarendon Street, East Melbourne?

Mr. DIXON (Minister of Youth, Sport and Recreation) : The funds for the conference are provided by the Department of Youth, Sport and Recreation and the body which has organized the conference is the Youth Council of Victoria.

KNOX EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT COMPLEX.

Mr. ROPER (Brunswick) . I ask the Assistant Minister of Hpalth wh~ther he is aware of a report on the evaluation of the Knox Early Childhood Development Complex which was presented to Dr. McCloskev some time ago. If so, can the Minister explain to the House why that report has not yet been made public and


can the honorable gentleman assure the House that it will be made public as soon as possible?

Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health) : There are many reports on that matter. I am not aware of the particular report that the honorable member has in mind but if he will give me details of it I shall have discussions with the chief health officer and refer the matter back to the honorable member.

BUILDING SOCIETIES' EQUITY.

Mr. EDMUNDS (Ascot Vale): Is the Minister of Housing aware that Victorian building societies' equity has fallen sharply in the past couple of months owing to the actions of the Fraser Government and, if so, what action does the honorable gentleman intend taking to restore confidence with respect to this aspect of the societies, activities and can he inform the House what action he proposes to take in the immediate future?

Mr. HAYES (Minister of Housing) : I am not aware of a sharp decline in reserves held by the permanent building societies or any connection with the actions of the Fraser Government. However, I am conscious of the fact that in recent weeks some publicity has been given to a dwindling of reserves of Queensland societies and, more recently in VictOria, to the Hotham-Latrobe group, which was reported upon last week.

Information is generally available regarding action which is foreshadowed . by the Government to amend legislation regarding societies in the forthcoming spring sessional period. The honorable member should know that the registrar's office has an inspection staff of fourteen, each society is required to render monthly accounts to the registrar's office and each society's annual return is subject to a detailed audit check.

It should be commonly known that Queensland building society interest rates are controlled by the Government, whereas in Victoria interest

rates are not controlled by legislation. Therefore Victorian societies can move freely and adjust with the rise and fall of the market.

BELGRA VE SOUTH SHOPPPING COMPLEX.

Mr. CA THIE (Carrum) : Is the Minister for Conservation aware of a report in today's Age that conservationists within his own electorate were gagged in their protests about approval being given to a new shopping complex in Belgrave South? Does the honorable gentleman consider such approval incompatible with the Government's conservation policy for the Dandenongs?

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): Order! The latter part of the honorable member's question asks for an opinion and is not permissible. The first part of the question is in order.

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister for Conservation): The honorable member is demonstrating his lack of knowledge of responsibilities in that area. Firstly, the reference in the paper did not cover any area within my electorate; that should be made clear. Secondly, I did not receive an invitation to the meeting as was suggested in the paper. Thirdly, statements of planning policy have nothing to do with the Minister for Conservation and are matters for the Minister for Planning.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT. RURAL INDUSTRIES.

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture) : I desire to make a Ministerial statement with respect to rural industries in Victoria.

In the past few weeks much has been written about the desperate plight of Victoria's farmers. It is therefore my duty to acquaint this Parliament with the problems of the rural community and the steps this Government has taken to try to help farmers. One of the major problems facing all farmers is inflation.

Ministerial [11 MAY, 1976.] Statement. 743

Because the majority of our rural products are sold on overseas markets, farmers are price-takers rather than price-makers. This means farmers are hit harder by inflation than probably any other section of the community. They are not in a position to pass on costs and if they increase production to improve their income they only add to the amount of product that must be sold overseas at low prices.

The Bureau of Agricultural Economics index of prices paid by Victorian farmers shows there was an increase of more than 70 per cent in the three years to last June. And as we all know, costs have continued to increase since then. On the other hand there have been dramatic falls in the returns to beef, milk and canning fruit producers. At the same time farmers lost taxation incentives, the superphosphate bounty, the consumer bounty on butter and cheese, free milk to school children, tax concessions on soft drink containing real fruit juice, and other balancing factors. On top of this just as farmers, hard hit by the 1967 drought, were beginning to recover they were hit again by another drought in 1971.

With really only one good season for the pastoral and dairy industries, we now have another severe drought, with crickets and locusts adding to the problem. Currently twelve shires have been declared drought areas and another 33 have applied. Because of low prices, this drought is affecting farmers perhaps more than any other drought has in our entire history.

The Premier has already announced that the Government will pay a 50 per cent rebate on rail transport costs of shipping stock from a drought area for agistment within the State. It will also pay a 50 per cent rebate on an approved rate on the movement of stock by road transport with the exception of the first 40 miles. The Government will pay a 50 per cent rebate on rail freight of fodder transported into declared drought areas.

The Premier has already written to the Premiers in adjoining States seeking a similar subsidy on rail transport of stock being transported into that State from Victorian drought areas for agistment.

Because the Rural Finance and Settlement Commission still has some money in the beef assistance scheme, and reconstruction and carry-on finance is expected to be made available shortly for dairyfarmers, dairyfarmers and beef producers who have liquidity problems have been advised to contact the Rural Finance and Settlement Commission.

In previous droughts, farmers were able to sell some of their stock and with the money obtained were able to purchase fodder to feed the rest of their animals. Today this is not the case. If farmers sell store-stock at the moment, many finish with a bill rather than a cheque.

Today the State Government has announced that it will pay a destruction fee of $5 for cattle slaughtered under municipal direction with 50 cents going to the municipality and $4.50 to the farmer. The State Government has been active in assisting and seeking assistance for our farmers, not only in their present CrIsis, but in all their problems. We have not only been willing to cooperate with the Federal Government but have also taken the initiative and led the way with assistance on many occasions.

WHEAT-In 1974 it was the Victorian Government which persuaded the Federal Labor Government to put money at risk in the five-year wheat stabilization scheme. The Victorian Government also fought to have the owner-operator's allowance included in the domestic price for wheat.

ApPLES AND PEARs-Victoria and the Commonwealth have paid subsidies of $68,000 for fruit exported at risk in 1974-75. Similar schemes are scheduled for 1975-76.

744 Ministerial [ASSEMBLY.] Statement.

CANNING FRUIT-This year the State Government provided a loan of $3 million with low interest to canneries to enable growers to be paid for last season's fruit which is repayable over three years.

VEGETABLEs-The State Government introduced legislation to help stabilize the tomato industry. The Tomato Processing Industry Bill to be enacted gives a stable contracting mechanism. I have also initiated talks with potato growers which could lead to similar legislation.

WINE GRAPES-I initiated discussions between New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia to discuss pricing and this I hope will lead to greater stability within this industry.

POULTRy-Broiler legislation has been introduced to give producers stability of contracts and price. Egg production control legislation is in operation.

Hops-Hop growers are experiencing over-production pr.oblems, and recently I initiated meetings between Victoria and Tasmania and an approach has been made to the Federal Minister for Primary Industry for assistance.

BEEF-In October, 1974, I called a meeting of representatives of the meat industry to discuss the problems of the industry.

At the Australian Agricultural Council meeting in February, 1975, Victoria requested a step up in the eradication of brucellosis and tuberculosis and asked the Federal Government to supply funds for this purpose.

In May, 1975, the Industries Assistance Commission recommended that the Federal Government pay 75 per cent towards compensating farmers for the slaughter of brucella reactors with the States paying 25 per cent.

In November, 1975, tired of waiting for Federal funds, the Victorian Government started the test-and-slaughter stage of the eradication of brucellosis. We were the only State to do so.

Mr. 1. W. Smith.

By the end of June this year, it is antiCipated that the Victorian compensation fund will be $400,000 in deficit and 15,000 reactors will have been slaughtered, and still we have not received any funds from Canberra nor has the Federal Government even made a decision.

During 1975, the State Government gave aid to beef producers in the form of $2 million at 4 per cent in loans and subsidies on both road and rail transport of cattle to market. It was only after this offer that the Federal Government was spurred into offering assistance to beef producers.

At the F,ebruary, 1976, meeting of the Australian Agricultural Council I persuaded the other States to agree to introduce a classification scheme for meat from 1st January next year. The Australian Meat Board has been asked to report to the August Australian Agricultural Council meeting on how such a schem·e can operate. A seminar was held in Adelaide last week to allow the industry to examine the board's plan for classification. It met with widespread acceptance.

Mr. WHITING: It is still five years away.

Mr. I. W. SMITH: That is up to the Federal Minister for Primary Industry.

DAIRYING--In 1974, the Victorian Government established the Board of Inquiry into the Dairy Industry to look at all aspects of the dairy industry. Also in 1974, I appointed an independent chairman to work towards unity of our two dairy farmer organizations and this unity has been achieved.

Because of political decisions in the European Economic Community, a mountain of skim milk powder has accumulated. The problems of low returns which now face dairy fanners became apparent about July last year. At the August meeting of the Australian Agricultural Council last year, the Federal Government refused to discuss the dairy industry until the Industries Assistance Commission had finished its report.


In October, I wrote to the then Minister for Agriculture, Dr. Patterson, pointing out that the situation in the dairy industry had deteriorated. At the February Agricultural Council, I asked the Federal Government to underwrite skim milk powder and casein. The Federal Minister wanted more time to look at various industry plans and it was not until 26th March, seven weeks later, that the Commonwealth offered to underwrite skim milk powder to $250 a tonne on a $1 for $1 basis with the States.

Perhaps I should point out that the National Party of Victoria wanted the Government to accept this offer immediately.

Mr. Ross-EDWARDS: That is not true and you know it.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): Order! The Minister of Agriculture is delivering a Ministerial statement. Honorable members will have an opportunity of discussing the matter and of putting forward their cases.

Mr. 1. W. SMITH: Two Victorian Ministers, the Minister for Conservation, Mr. Borthwick, and I, attended the special Agricultural Council. We argued against the principle of States underwriting, as did all State Ministers, and pointed out that $250 would not put money in dairy farmers' pockets. The danger in a State Government underwriting an export is that it sets a dangerous precedent. What will happen when the new fiveyear wheat stabilization scheme comes up for review? Will the States be asked for a share? Will the States have to take part in the wool floor price?

If the future of rural aid is to rely on States contributing, then the amount of aid will always be dependent on how much the poorest or least involved State can afford. As a result of our arguments, the Federal Government later offered to underwrite to $300 a tonne on a $2 for $1 basis.

Since the Victorian Government agreed to join the underwriting scheme for skim milk powder, the Federal Government has changed the rules twice. The last change was sent to the Premier by telex last week. Originally we were told that the total cost of underwriting skim milk powder at $300 a tonne would be $15 million and Victoria's share would be 78·2 per cent of one-third of that amount-$3· 9 million. Then we were told it would apply only to skim milk powder which was sold through the equalization scheme. This lifted Victoria's share to 82 per cent and let Queensland out without having to pay one cent.

The Premier then calculated that this would cost Victoria up to $4 million, so he set that as the limit. However, last week the Premier received a telex from the Prime Minister saying that the total cost of the scheme would be $68 million, which will make Victoria's share about $18 million. Naturally Victoria had to check this calculation. The telex was drafted by the Minister for Primary Industry.

The Victorian Government has agreed to underwrite skim milk powder. We have also agreed to take part in reconstruction and carry-on finance. However, we are still waiting for final details from Canberra, and have been since the Premier sent a telex to the Prime Minister on 14th April stating our agreement.

Another meeting of the Agricultural Council will be held this Friday, 14th May, to discuss production cutbacks. This Government is against any production cut-backs unless the cut-backs are on a national basis and are based on the high cost producers being the first out of the industry.

The Bureau of Agricultural Economics survey, conducted from 1971-72 to 1973-74, showed that the average cost of producing a litre of milk on all farms in Victoria was 3·3 cents; in New South Wales it was


5·5 cents; in Queensland 5·8 cents; and in Western Australia it was 6·3 cents.

On the other hand, if we average returns from milk and milk products in each State, we find that New South Wales farmers, on average, receive equivalent to $1.35 a pound butterfat; Western Australia, 96 cents; Queensland, 90 cents; and Victoria, only 69 cents. Victoria is the most efficient cost producer.

Equalization first came into being as a method of evening out returns to producers. The present equalization no longer does this and, in fact, has led to even greater differences between farmers. This is not to say that the principle of equalization is wrong-it is just that the present system of equalization is not good enough for today.

When we look at the wheat industry, we find that the total home market returns are pooled with the total export market returns and farmers are paid an equal equalized return. However, in the dairy industry, we do not equalize the returns of the best market-the liquid milk market. Also there are so many factories, and even States that do not take part in the equalization of one or more products, and there are separate equalization pools for different products.

An example of this is the fact that Queensland does not participate in skim milk powder equalization. Queensland claims it can sell all the skim milk powder it produces on the local market at around $450 to $500 a tonne and therefore should not have to contribute towards the present underwriting of skim milk powder. What Queensland fails to realize is that, if equalization did not exist, Victoria could and would sell its skim milk powder into Queensland for a lot less and it could well be that Queensland would have to export its product. Until all milk and products from all States are equalized, then equalization cannot balance returns

Mr. 1. W. Smith.

to farmers. How can we remove the parochial interest of each State and develop a national industry?

As I see it, State Governments and industry can either sit down and negotiate an orderly transfer of returns so that all Australian farmers receive an equal share of the market, or sit back and watch a disorderly transfer, which will make returns to all farmers crash. With an orderly transfer, we will be able to keep a premium price for liquid milk and an orderly price for other products. With a disorderly transfer, with farmers and factories fighting for a share of the high-priced home markets, prices are likely to crash to export parity.

In such a fight, only the low-cost producers would survive and, as I have already mentioned, Victoria's cost of production is lower than that in any other State, so its survival chances are naturally the highest. The Victorian Government would rather see change by negotiation but, if this is not possible, we will be forced to take action to prevent our own farmers from cutting each other's throats.

UNEMPLOYMENT-The Victorian Government has also taken the initiative in trying to obtain unemployment benefits and household support for farmers. On 14th April I sent a telex to Senator Guilfoyle seeking clarification of the conditions for unemployment benefits. The Premier telexed the Prime Minister pointing out the differences between regional officers of social security when assessing farmers for unemployment.

I followed this up by talking to both Senator Guilfoyle and Mr. Sinc1air. The Victorian Government should not have had to do this; it should have been organized by the Federal Minister for Primary Industry, Mr. Sinc1air, in consultation with Senator Guilfoyle and the Federal Cabinet. After my discussions with both Federal Ministers, a Federal Cabinet sub-committee was formed and just this morning Mr. Sinclair announced that farmers would be eligible for unemployment benefits.


Mr. WHITING: Why are you grizzling?

Mr. I. W. SMITH: I am not grizzling. I am just stating facts. The honorable member would not be able to determine the difference. However, the aid announced this morning will cover only farmers who are actively seeking work. The Victorian Government has also asked for household support-which was previously recommended by the Industries Assistance Commission. Household support is needed for those farmers who cannot, for various reasons, make themselves available for full-time work, and who are not eligible for carry-on loans from the Rural and Finance Settlement Commission.

The cash operating surplus to Victorian dairy farmers in the seasons 1971-72, 1972-73 and 1973-74 averaged out at $12,700 a year and for this season it is $2,000. The Henderson report highlighted rural poverty even during the years of reasonable returns. It is much worse today. During this period, interest payments have almost doubled and prices have soared. When this is coupled with increased prices and interest rates, which have almost doubled, it is obvious that many farmers cannot meet their financial commitments and have no money to live on.

lt is therefore imperative that farmers with very low or negative returns are given financial assistance. This assistance should be given in three ways-

Unemployment benefits for those who can offer themselves for fulltime work;

Household support for those who do not qualify for unemployment benefits or carry-on finance; and

Carry-on loans for those who will be viable in the long term.

Through the urging of this Government, we have now obtained unemployment benefits, carry-on loans are already available for beef producers and will shortly be available for

dairy farmers and we will continue to press the Federal Government for household support.

FREIGHT RATEs-The Victorian Government has also kept rail freights down for farmers. In October, 1973, rail freights rose by 5 per cent; however, there was no increase for the transportation of fertilizer. In October, 1974, there was a general freight increase of 22· 5 per cent. However, the increase was reduced to 10 per cent for grains, fertilizer and livestock. In August, 1975, there was a general freight increase of 20 per cent. However, fertilizer, grains, wool, and livestock were excluded from any of this increase.

Therefore, during this period although the general freight rose by 47·5 per cent, the cost of transporting fertilizer rose by only 10 per cent, the cost of transporting grain and livestock rose by only 15 per cent and the increase in wool was only 27·5 per cent.

On top of all this, the Victorian Government has presented submissions to the following Industries Assistance Commission inquiries-

Apple and pear; dried fruits; potatoes; beef; dairy; superphosphate; rural reconstruction; extension services.

These are only some of the initiatives taken by the Victorian Government in its co-operation with Federal Governments. I find it hard to imagine how anyone could expect a State Government to do more. However, the Premier in his policy speeches did go further by announcing that the State Government would-

Support the grain insect control programme, with officers working with the Grain Elevators Board and the Victorian Railways, and through extensive publicity and educational programmes.

Establish a livestock market price information service.


Station further agricultural economics officers in country areas to provide farm business management advice to farmers.

Appoint specially trained officers at regional centres to advise the increasing number of farmers who need socio-economic advice and skilled counselling.

Establish new district offices at Seymour, Ararat and Geelong, each with a senior district officer.

Transfer the operation of the Melbourne Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Market from the Melbourne City Council to a new market trust, composed principally of users of the market, in accordance with the recommendations of the State Development Committee.

Establish a working party to investigate and prepare outline plans for the transfer of the Newmarket sale-yards.

Assist both the dairy industry and the nutrition of pre-school children by re-introducing a subsidy for free milk and other preschool groups.

Press for a single meat inspection and a single authority, either Federal or State, on a uniform basis throughout Australia.

Establish an agricultural education research unit to provide continuing information on the needs of the farming community and the effectiveness of educational programmes provided.

Provide Dookie and Longerenong colleges with separate advisory committees so that each college can quickly develop its own character and provide education programmes in response to regional needs.

Establish the McMillan Rural Studies Centre, including decentralized facilities, and the appointment of district education offices at major centres in Gippsland.

Mr. I. W. Smith.

Improve facilities at Longerenong to enable it to develop a more effective role as a regional resource centre.

Expand the range of courses available at Dookie, Glenormiston and Longerenong and increase their accessibility to present and future farmers and the rural community.

Legislate for a special category of registration, fees and third-party insurance for farm motor vehicles, including motorcycles, and tractors used primarily on farms.

Arrange an inquiry immediately, into the circumstances where some rural properties are adversely affected, for rating purposes, by values of nearby residential or industrial development, and where the discretionary "farm rate" and "urban farm rate" are not being effectively used by municipal councils in some cases to prevent rural properties carrying an undue proportion of the rates.

Investigate with the State Savings Bank and Rural Finance and Settlement Commission ways and means of providing long-term finance for the rural industry on reasonable terms.

Develop more regional freight centres at major cities and towns around the State to enable the railways to compete in efficiency and service with road transport.

Eliminate progressively all existing road transport regulations over the course of the next five years and allow road and rail free and full competition for freight on the basis of service, efficiency and cost, as recommended in the Bland report.

Increase the limit of farm forestry loans from $125 per hectare to $200 per hectare and the maximum amount of the loan from $5,000 to $8,000.


Set up a special fund to allow decentralized industries to tender for Government contracts with an advantage of 5 per centwith the fund meeting the additional cost on the contract.

Promote the development of industrial estates on Crown land or municipal land for occupation by decentralized industries.

Call on the Federal Government to-

(a) reduce P.M.G. charges for decentralized industries to capital city levels; (b) cease taxing our financial incentives to decentralized industries.

Mr. Speaker, this statement, couched in general terms, highlights some of the problems of rural Victoria, and points to many of this Government's initiatives in the area of assistance.

Honorable members will be able to add their contribution to this debate and ideas flowing from it will be studied and where possible implemented. I move-

That the Ministerial Statement be taken into consideration tomorrow. I have arranged with the Leader of the House that this debate shall be listed at the head of the Notice Paper for tomorrow.

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition): In view of the detailed statement and the fact that the debate will be resumed tomorrow, is the Minister prepared to give an undertaking, as a matter of emergency, that he will lay on the table of the Library documents covering some of the matters to which he has referred in his Ministerial statement? I refer particularly to the submissions which the Victorian Government has presented to the Industries Assistance Commission as listed on page 9; to the minutes of the Australian Agricultural Council meeting in February, 1976, referred to on page 4; to the copies of correspondence, submissions, memoranda, and so on, dealing with the Victorian Government's submission to the Federal Govern-

Session 1976.-26

ment, referred to on page 4; and to the file dealing with the Victorian Government's submissions, copies of all correspondence, memoranda, and so on, dealing with the underwriting scheme for skim milk powder referred to on page 5.

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture) (By leave): I give the undertaking sought by the Leader of the Opposition. The list is too long for me to remember, but if he will supply me with a copy I shall arrange forthwith for the material to be tabled.

Mr. WHITING (Mildura): The Leader of the Opposition has suggested that certain matters should be laid on the table of the Library. For the purpose of the debate tomorrow, surely it will be necessary for the papers to be tabled for the convenience of honorable members.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): The Minister has agreed to lay on the table of the Library the material referred to by the Leader of the Opposition. This makes it available to all honorable members.

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition) (By leave): There is one aspect that perhaps should be considered. The practice of the Library is to make only the file available, and it cannot be photostated. Any required information has to be taken down in longhand. Having regard to the importance of the debate, in addition to laying the information on the table of the Library, the Minister might consent to certain of the documents being photostated, and perhaps he will make available copies of certain material to the Leader of the National Party and myself. In this way honorable members entering the debate will have access to that information.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): The Minister may make available that material for the 'Leaders of the respective parties. It is not within my power to order that files which are laid on the table of the Library shall be photostated. That

750 Papers. [ASSEMBLY.] Victorian Film Corporation Bill.

is a matter for the Library Com· mittee. The Minister may photostat and distribute copies.

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture) (By leave): It may be preferable if I make photostat copies of all the material available and distribute one copy to the Opposition and one to the National Party, together with any explanations that may be required.


PAPERS.

The following papers, pursuant to the directions of several Acts of Parliament, were laid on the table by the Clerk-Melbourne University-Statement of

accounts for the year 1974. Statutory Rules under the following Acts-

Magistrates Courts Act 1971, Magistrates (Summary Proceedings) Act 1975, the Landlord and Tenant Act 1958 and Acts Interpretation Act 1958-No. 99.

Public Service Act 1974-PSD No, 57 and PSD No. 58.

GIPPSLAND FOLK MUSEUM BILL.

Mr. BALFOUR (Minister tor Fuel and Power), by leave, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to make provision for the establishment of a Gippsland Folk Museum Authority for developing and fostering the Gippsland Folk Museum at Moe and for other purposes connected therewith.


The Bill was brought in and read a first time.

ABATTOIR AND MEAT INSPECTION (AMENDMENT) BILL.

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture), by leave, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Abattoir and Meat Inspection Act 1973.



VICTORIAN FILM CORPORA TION BILL.

Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport), by leave, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to constitute a Victorian Film Corporation to encourage and promote the production, exhibition and distribution of films, television programmes, and other entertainments and works.



MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT (AMENDMENT) BILL.

Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport) , by leave, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Ministry of Transport Act 1958 and for other purposes.



REVOCATION AND EXCISION OF CROWN RESERVATIONS BILL.

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister for Conservation), by leave, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to revoke the permanent reservations of certain lands and for other purposes.



JOINT SELECT COMMITIEE (ENERGY) BILL.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler) announced the presentation of a message from His Excellency the Governor recommending that an appropriation be made from the Consolidated Fund for the purposes of the Joint Select Committee (Energy) Bill.

Mr. BALFOUR (Minister for Fuel and Power), pursuant to Standing Order No. 169, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to constitute a Joint Select Committee to inquire into and


report upon the conservation of energy resources in Victoria and for other purposes.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and read

a first time.

HOME FINANCE (LOANS AND GUARANTEES) BILL.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler) announced the presentation of a message from His Excellency the Governor recommending that an appropriation be made from the Consolidated Fund for the purposes of the Home Finance (Loans and Guarantees) Bill.

Mr. HA YES (Minister of Housing), pursuant to Standing Order No. 169, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Home Finance Act 1962 for making further provision with respect to loans on second mortgage made by the Home Finance Trust and guarantees given by the Treasurer for the repayment of certain loans, and for other purposes.


a first time.


The debate (adjourned from April 29) on the motion of Mr. Hamer (Premier and Treasurer) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. WILTON (Broadmeadows): The purpose of the Bill is to make 'Some significant changes in the licensing of wholesale tobacco merchants, and this will require some consequential changes to the licences of retail tobacco merchants.

When explaining the Bill the Premier indicated to the House that the Treasury was losing some revenue because of a practice in which some wholesalers were apparently engaging. It appears from what the Premier has said and from discussions I have had with officers of the Treasury that some people are able

to control the volume of tobacco handled through the wholesale business because the licence is paid annually. This would have an effect on the licence fee. I take this opportunity of thanking the Treasurer and the officers concerned for the co-operation that I have received. The Government now proposes to reduce the currency of licences issued to tobacco wholesalers to a period of one month.

It is also intended to provide for what will be known as group wholesalers. This action will close a loophole whereby wholesalers have been able to transfer their licences to other persons or companies whose volume sales have been at a fairly low level.

In changing the system of licences to a monthly basis, the Government will obtain increased revenue. Previously, a wholesaler's licence cost $100 a year plus 10 per cent of the value of tobacco sales handled by the wholesaler. By changing to a monthlysystem and charging $10 a month the Government is, in effect, increasing the base rate from $100 a year to $120 a year.

In recent months, the Government has said quite a lot about inflation and what Governments ought to be doing. This was particularly so when the Whitlam Government was in power in Canberra. The Victorian Government almost daily handed out advice, not only by the Premier but also by other Ministers.

It is interesting that, since the Government introduced this licensing scheme for wholesale and retail tobacconists, for the year 1974-75 the revenue was $1·5 million. I understand that the licence fee was then 1·25 per cent. The fee was later increased to 5 per cent, and from 1st January this year to 10 per cent, so there has been an increase of 100 per cent in less than twelve months and this will bring into the Treasury $20 million in a full year. Honorable members will agree that an increase from $1·5 million to $20 million a year represents a hefty rise.

752 Business Franchise [ASSEMBLY.] (Tobacco) Bill.

Mr. BIRRELL: That is only a fraction of the revenue obtained by the Commonwealth Government.

Mr. WILTON: I am referring to the Victorian Government, which has been continually handing out advice on how to combat inflation and what Governments ought to do.

Mr. Ross-EDWARDS: The honorable member is away from the Bill.

Mr. WILTON: The Leader of the National Party is not interested in coming to grips with these problems. The honorable member waffles on about many extraneous matters which are quite unrelated to the question.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): The honorable member for Broadmeadows is dealing with extraneous matters himself.

Mr. WILTON: The Bill relates to licences for wholesale and retail tobacconists and I was saying that the revenue to be derived from these licences has immeasurably increased. Admittedly, under this Bill, the additional revenue from wholesale tobacconists will probably be something like $600-$20 a year for each wholesaler. This amount is infinitesimal when compared with $20 million.

I am wondering whether there will be a corresponding flow of finance from the Government to institutions such as the Anti-Cancer Council. Often this House has debated the Government's financial contribution towards the work of the council. To date the Government has been niggardly in the matter and now that the Government has been able to manipulate the situation to obtain considerably more revenue from the sale of tobacco in this State-estimated in a full year to be of the order of $20 mill ion-I am hopeful it will be more generous towards bodies such as the Anti-Cancer Council.

It is now accepted by all sections of the community that tobacco is making a significant contribution to deterioration in the health of people in the community and it is the

responsibility of the Government, if it is prepared to levy fees of this nature for revenue purposes, and to have its name and the names of its Ministers associated with the bodyindeed, the Minister of Health is a member of the council----to make a greater financial contribution than it has in the past.

Mr. ROSS-EDWARDS (Leader of the National Party): The National Party supports the Bill, which is intended to plug certain loopholes which have arisen in the operation of the Business Franchise (Tobacco) Act. As the Premier stated when he explained the Bill, some wholesalers in Victoria, by devious means, have avoided the payment of duty and it is now necessary to institute a scheme for monthly payments instead of annual payments. As was also explained, groups of people within an association in the trade have avoided the duty. As so often happens with revenueraising measures, it is necessary to amend the law accordingly.





Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport) : On behalf of the Government, I thank the honorable member for Broadmeadows and the Leader of the National Party for their support of the Bill.



COMMONWEALTH AND STATES FINANCIAL AGREE.MENT BILL.


Commonwealth and States [11 MAY, 1976.] Financial Agreement Bill. 753

Mr. ROSS-EDW ARDS (Leader of the National Party) : This is a measure to approve an agreement between the Commonwealth and the six States concerning the financial agreement made in 1927 which has been the subject of many amendments over the years. The agreement will need to be ratified by all States and the Commonwealth prior to June next.

One of the main purposes of the measure relates to debt charges of $1,000 million for which responsibility was taken over by the Commonwealth from the States in 1970 at the rate of $200 million a year. The extent to which each State has been given assistance with its debt charges has been in proportion to the amount of loan money each State owed at that time. The amount outstanding for Victoria was approximately $241 million. It is interesting that this represented roughly one-quarter of the total, and almost inevitably what Victoria gains and what it pays under the Commonwealth-State Federal financial relationships usually amounts to almost exactly one-quarter.

The Bill is a complex financial measure in which a schedule has been included of the details of the various loans involved. The National Party supports the Bill and wishes it a speedy passage.

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition) : I apologize for not being present when the Bill was called on, but I was at a function being conducted by the Government. This is a simple Bill to give effect to the execution of an agreement entered into by the Commnnwealth and the six States in Ftoruary, 1976. Its purpose is to amend the existing financial agreement. Details of the agreement are set out in the schedule. This Bill consists primarily of a set of proposals wrapped around a schedule, and the details and effect of that schedule and the agreement are fully described in the Treasurer's second-reading speech. The Bill is not opposed by the Opposition.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was read a second time

and committed. Clause 1 was agreed to. Clause 2 (Commencement).

Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport) : On behalf of the Government I thank the Leader of the National Party and the Leader of the Opposition for their support of the Bill.



TATIERSALL CONSULTATIONS (SOCCER FOOTBALL POOLS) BILL

(No. 2).


Mr. TREZISE (Geelong North): The Opposition does not oppose this Bill because it is the outcome of the original Bill which was passed by this House in 1974, when betting on soccer, known as soccer pools, was introduced into Victoria-the first time it had been introduced anywhere in Australia. The original legislation appointed Tattersall's as the agent and Tattersall's in turn appointed as its agent, Vernon Pools, the well known and reputable English firm that had been experienced in soccer pools for many years. Vernons appointed Australian Soccer Pools Ltd. to carry out the operation in Victoria.

It was a surprise that soccer pools were requested in this State because they were introduced shortly after the inauguration of betting on Australian rules football, a venture which was a complete flop. Therefore Vernons, by preparing to introduce soccer pools, was taking a huge gamble. At that time I predicted that soccer pools would go the same way as the Australian rules pools,

754 Tattersall Consultations (Soccer [ASSEMBLY.] Football Pools) Bill (No. 2).

but I am pleased to say that, with many other members of this House, I was wrong and that soccer pools are going from strength to strength.

When one considers that in Victoria people already have a choice of gambling on Tattersall's lotteries, Tattslotto and the Totalizator Agency Board, one realizes that Vernons took on a difficult task. Their theory was that if they fixed a large prize for the first prize winner, unlike the football pools, they would attract customers. The large first prize which can be won in Tattslotto attracts many thousands of entries. Vernons guaranteed that the first prize would be the equivalent of the first prize available in England and to achieve this they had to contribute a large subsidy.

The main theme of the system is 57 matches, of which many are now being played in Australia and on which people in England can fill in a coupon. The aim of a player is to select eight score draws. In the first year of operation in Victoria soccer pools turned over $5 million, and that has grown to about $25 million, which demonstrates how the public now patronize the pools. One-third of the investments in soccer pools goes to Australian Soccer Pools Ltd. for its operation costs and advertising; 20 per cent to the State to be allocated to the Department of Youth, Sport and Recreation; 10 per cent to the Hospitals and Charities Fund; and a mere 37 per cent to the prize winners. When I say " mere", it is mere when one considers that Totalizator Agency Board prize winners receive 82 to 83 per cent of the pool as dividends.

To boost the intake of money, the operators of the soccer pools naturally sought business in other States. Now New South Wales and Tasmania have passed legislation to legalize soccer pools in those States, and in the past couple of weeks Queensland has passed similar legislation.

Mr. Trezise.

The purpose of this Bill is to authorize the promoter to pay the duty to those States direct. The original legislation provided that the revenue was paid to the other States from the Victorian Government. I am sure this amendment is supported by all honorable members.

Soccer pools serve a useful purpose not only because they provide State revenue, but because soccer is a growing part of Victorian community life. No one can disagree with the fact that interest in soccer has grown throughout the length and breadth of Australia. The number of people of younger age who are playing soccer in the schools, on the streets, and in televised soccer games has increased, as has the number of people who watch soccer on television. In the same way that cricket and tennis go side by side as summer sports, there is no reason why football and soccer cannot go side by side as the main winter sports of the Victorian public.

The game of soccer creates a tremendous amount of international goodwill, which cannot be said about Australian rules football. On Sunday an English side played here and in recent years sides from Japan, Russia and Germany have visited Australia. The creation of goodwill between Australia and other countries through soccer is of benefit to every person in Australia.

It is often said that at present too much gambling takes place in the community. That may be right or wrong; a person does not have to participate in the gambling that is available. But to say that Victoria is the gambling centre of Australia is certainly well off the line when one considers that in the 1974-75 financial year through Tattslotto, the Totalizator Agency Board, TattersaIl's, soccer pools and other gambling the turnover in Victoria was $700 million, an average of $200 a head of population or $4 a week. Victoria certainly seems

Tattersall Consultations (Soccer [11 MAY, 1976.] Football Pools) Bill (No. 2). 755

to be a gambling State, but in comparison with gamblers in New South Wales Victorian gamblers are saints. In New South Wales the turnover in the 1974-75 financial year was $1,318 million, being $360 per annum for each head of population, $7 a week or $1 a day. In other words, New South Welshmen gamble twice as much as do Victorians.

On the whole the Opposition supported the original Bill and it supports this amending Bill, which makes a small alteration to the original purpose. I wish soccer pools a growing and prosperous future in Victoria and throughout Australia.

Mr. ROSS-EDWARDS (Leader of the National Party): The National Party supports this Bill, which amends the original Tattersall Consultations Act of 1958, and makes football pools a national venture. Agreement had already been reached between Victoria, New South Wales and Tasmania, on duty and, as the honorable member for Geelong North has said, negotiations with Queensland are in train. It is also expected that in the near future negotiations wil1 take place with the other three States and perhaps the various Territories of Australia. This will mean that those States win receive direct from the promoter, the Government duty on money which is invested in those States. It is a sensible system of co-operation between the States, will give strength to soccer pools and no doubt engender greater interest.


and committed. Clause 1 was agreed to. Clause 2 (Amendment of No.

6390).

Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport) : On behalf of the Government I thank the honorable member for Geelong North and the Leader of the National Party for their support of this Bill.

The clause was agreed to.


SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BILL

The debate (adjourned from April 27) on the motion of Mr. Balfour (Minister for Fuel and Power) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition): This is an interesting Bill in line with the philosophy of the Government. Inasmuch as by its mere existence it recognizes the role of small business in our community and provides the basis for information to flow to people who run small businesses, its objects are laudatory. However, if small businessmen believe the Bill goes any real distance towards meeting the problems that bedevil them and the general state of the economy, they will be grievously disappointed.

The heart of the Bill lies in three concepts. The first is the creation of a corporation, which is the body that will be responsible for administering the Bill. The second is the responsibilities that the corporation will have, and they may be summarized as, firstly, an information-providing structure and, secondly, once it is established, a body to provide an ongoing degree of training so that small businessmen who lack managerial expertise in the conduct of their business will be able to obtain it through the direction of the agents of the corporation. It is not clear how this will be done, but presumably they will be able to encourage the development of certain courses at institutes of learning, and direct small businessmen into them. Those are beneficial activities.

The third concept of the Bill which is important is what can be broadly described as the guarantee provisions, which are referred to in clause 15. That is the only basis upon which any on-going financial assistance is provided to the small businessman.

756 Small Business Development [ASSEMBLY.] Corporation Bdl.

Having examined the alternatives that are available, the Opposition is critical of the approach of the Government on this aspect. Although it may be beneficial t'O you, Mr. Speaker, as someone who has run a small business, to have the backing of a Government guarantee, if you re-entered business now and faced substantial opposition you would be under considerable pressure. ,Many small businessmen find that, despite their efforts, a large superm'arket or chain store operation sets up suddenly in their immediate business locality, and they are in difficulty. The heart of any business is the on-going finance that is needed t'O assist it in the various stages, such as finance for expansion and development or finance necessary to help the business through a period of slump.

The guarantee offers some assistance, because if a pers'On goes to a bank manager and says, "I am conducting a small business, and the Treasurer of Victoria is prepared to guarantee my losses because he has received a recommendation from the Small Business Development Corporation to follow that course of action ", the hank manager or financier who is lending the money may feel a little more secure, but the interest rate would not be reduced. If a person borrowed money by mortgaging the freehold on his property, he would still have to pay the contemporary rate of interest, which is about 14 per cent.

What is needed to aid small business and industry in Victoria-and this is the policy of the Labor Partyis acti'On to extend the structure 'Of the State Bank of Victoria, and to establish a rural and development bank which would be responsible for making decisions on which areas of business and manufacturing it would assist. No apology should be made for the fact that that assistance is part of an 'On-going banking function which aims at providing interest at lower than the prevailing rate.

That will not happen under this proposed legislation, and it is interesting to notice that although it was

Mr. Holding.

suggpc:;ted in the second-reading speech that this Bill was the result of research and examination of overseas examples in Canada, the United States of America and France, where corporati'Ons like this have been created by statute, the difference is that in those communities there is the capacity to lend directly.

I am generally unhappy about the functions 'Of the guarantee provided in this measure. I should prefer a direct Treasury grant for X million dollars to be made available to the corporation and the c'Orporation to have the right to lend that out 'at a certain rate of interest to provide a revolving fund. The danger in a guarantee situation is that if errors of judgment are made the taxpayer will pay for them, because under the provisions of the Bill if a businessman fails to meet his 'Obligations the Treasurer of Victoria, having guaranteed 'a loan, is authorized to pay the liability directly out of the Consolidated Fund. I regard that as undesirable. The pressure should be on any Treasurer in that situation to conduct a fairly conservative policy in the guarantees he gives.

It is not impossible to envisage situations where the total 'Of a guarantee fund of this type would be quite substantial, and no Treasurer will want to guarantee a small business where some risk is involved. This is precisely my point, that often the business which is in difficulty is the one that really needs assistance. The Government is adopting a conservative fiscal Treasury approach to this aspect, and the guarantee might be inadequate.

The other aspect I should like to raise, because it arose in connection with the Victorian Development Corporation, is the availability of information on the guarantees that are given. I have always believed strongly that there must be accountability for public funds, and their use and guarantee. I have always been critical of a situation where, as occurred with the Victorian Development C'Orporation, large sums of

Small Business Development [ 11 MAY, 1976.] Corporation Bill. 757

money are made available to various enterprises at low interest rates, and information about those loans is not forthcoming to honorable members because it is confidential to the business.

Mr. B. J. EVANS: Not unless the Minister wants to 'advertise it first, and then he asks permission.

Mr. HOLDING: If public moneys are being guaranteed or lent, there has to be a mechanism by which the details of those transactions are made available either to party Leaders or to members of the House, or by which the Auditor-General reports on those loans that he regards as being outside the ambit of those who operate the fund.

The difficulty arose with the Victorian Development Corporation that people had obviously been guilty of some errors of business judgment, and businessmen who had received substantial sums of money did not reveal their business problems or that their companies were in difficulties. In such a situation, some kind of ongoing report must be available to Parliament.

I can appreciate the argument that a businessman ought to be able to seek assistance and that there ought to be some reasonable privacy in that matter. Although that is true, if funds or guarantees are being made available at lower than the prevailing market interest, the applicant has toQ be prepared to accept a degree of public scrutiny which he does not expect in his usual commercial transactions.

The Opposition is critical of this measure because, althoQugh the Bill recognizes some f'airly important principles, in certain areas it will be totally inadequate to meet the problems that exist in the small business community.

I do not think many small businessmen in rural Victoria at present would be keen to sell farm m'achinery. Everyone knows that when a crisis occurs in the rural community, businessmen such as grocers or drapers or

those who are in the business of selling farm machinery are all caught by the general depression as it affects the communities they are serving. If one went into some small country towns in Victoria, one would find thousands of reputable, hard-working businessmen who are trying to do the right thing by their customers.

Farmers have always acquired goods on credit, and when they are caught up in a depressed economic situation it is of no use for the local businessman to say to the farmer who is shooting his cattle at Tongala, "You owe me $500 for goods supplied; you had better pay up ". He must simply try to carry the debt. That means that at present, while honorable members are talking about assistance to small business, many small businesses in regional parts of Victoria, either by virtue of the locality of the region, or by the nature of the business conducted in the region, are in desperate need of finance, and there is no 'Ongoing structure from which they can obtain assistance.

What is the use of saying to a small businessman in that situation, " As a result of this marvelloQus piece of legislation, we will give you managerial advice", or, "We will print you some pamphlets telling you hoQw to go broke more slowly or quickly"?

The small businessman needs legislation which will enable a Government structure to back him up by long-term low-interest finance, and the only way that can be done is by developing the resources of the State Bank of Victoria. This Bill does not provide that type of on-going financial structure. Therefore, although it takes some minor steps and is generally heading in the right direction, it is like many of the other problems of this Government; it is a set of glib propositions which, when properly examined, are without real substance when it comes to dealing with the problems that exist in the community.

If one goes to a small country town one will find that most of the small businesses are going to the wall

758 Small Business Development [ASSEMBLY.] Corporation Bill.

through no fault of their own, but simply because of the prevailing state of the economy. What does it do about that situation? It can promise the businessman some sort of course.

I believe this Bill does not go far enough. It is not geared and structured to the really significant economic problems that bedevil small business. To the extent that the Bill provides managerial advice, and that kind of service, it is a step in the right direction, but that is only one aspect of the problem. Members of the Opposition are not prepared to vote against the Bill because it is a forward step, but we do not accept the view that this is epoch-making legislation of the kind that will solve the problems that bedevil small businesses.

There are a number of concepts which have not been properly examined. If the Government, as it said, examined overseas examples, it should have produced a draft statute under which the Small Business Development Corporation could receive a flow of finance from the Consolidated Fund and actually lend to small businesses at lower than bank interest. This would create a revolving fund. That would be a far better business bet than the structure this measure creates. On this aspect I should be interested to hear from the Minister, who has said that all overseas examples have been looked at. As I have indicated, it exists in at least three other countries; why was it not emulated?

This Bill embodies an odd concept of guarantee, but I believe in the final analysis it will create more problems than it solves. The responsibility for it rests entirely with the Government, but the Opposition points out that if it is believed this Bill will solve the real problems that are bedevilling small businessmen throughout the length and breadth of this State the Government has its head in the clouds, and so also has the Minister. I hope that before the Bill

Mr. Holding.

is introduced into another place the Government will consider some of the proposals made by the Opposition.

If the Government says as a matter of philosophy, "We believe we need to provide some on-going service to help small businesses in this community" and we agree with that proposition-the Government should provide assistance which is significant and meaningful, and not engage in yet another public relations gesture which will give the few people appointed by the Government a title and enable them to walk around and say, "I am a commissioner of the corporation assisting small businesses". The legislation should provide a structure which is real and meaningful and which is able to assist small businessmen with the problems that bedevil them.

Mr. MeINNES (Gippsland South) : This Bill to constitute a Small Business Development Corporation is supported by the National Party. It follows to some degree the very fine blueprint which the National Party brought out during the last election. It, of course, originated also from action taken by our Federal colleagues. The National Party can claim to have taken a major part in a very vital area. However, in looking at this Bill one can liken it to the swimmer who puts his toe in the water to feel the temperature of the water. Australia is a country predominantly composed of small businesses, so we are told, and I think it is regrettable that this Bill is such a pale shadow of what exists in other countries.

As the Leader of the Opposition said, this is probably a public relations exercise. Taxation statistics for 1970-71 suggest that small enterprises comprised 93 per cent of manufacturing firms, 97 per cent of wholesale and retail businesses, and 93 per cent of finance, insurance, real estate and similar service enterprises.

In the manufacturing area, 97 per cent of firms classified as small enterprises employed apprOXimately 50 per

Small Business Development [11 MAY, 1976.] Corporation Bill. 759

cent of the factory work force. In the retail field, some 99 per cent of establishments - that is a very high percentage - reported an annual turnover of $500,000 or less in that same study and their aggregate turnover amounted to 75 per cent of the total turnover of all retail establishments in Australia. In the wholesale sector, between 80 per cent and 95 per cent of wholesale businesses would be classified as small enterprises.

In terms of total employment, an analysis of the Australian work force in February, 1975, suggested that 20 per cent were Government employees, 33 per cent were employed in large commercial enterprises, 42 per cent were in small enterprises and 5 per cent were unemployed. This brings us to the nub of it. The conditions of employment of public servants, their tremendous security, four weeks' holiday, 17·5 per cent holiday loading, and unusually generous working conditions cannot be matched by the small businessman in his work. Public servants are also exposed to very little financial risk. The small businessman naturally becomes very dissatisfied. His is an entrepreneural business with a great element of risk, and generally it succeeds or fails on his own personal abilities and the effort he puts into the enterprise. From this point of view the small businessman is greatly disadvantaged.

If the figures which I have cited are correct, and I am sure they must be, this Bill deals with the lives and fortunes of 42 per cent of the 2·5 million people in employment in Australia. It is quite common in other growing countries of the world for Governments to have a very positive commitment to small business and small enterprise. This happens in leading countries such as Canada, the United States of America and West Germany, because they recognize the importance to the economy of small business. All the experts on this subject are unanimous in their opinion

that Australia is an extremely backward country, and Victoria shares part of that tag.

The Minister, in his second-reading speech, acknowledges the hardships and pressures experienced by small business enterprise through the ravage of inflation. He states that the Government is determined to do something constructive about the situation. We were heartened by those kind words, but our hopes were then dashed. The Minister said, in effect, "We will give you some encouragement and advice. We will also go out to industry and see if your competitors will give you advice". I doubt whether that would happen. However, no money was offered. The Government might guarantee a loan but will provide no funds for those people because, after all, it has to keep that for the bigger businesses and corporations which, in the Government's opinion, are the mainstay of the economy.

Most overseas countries have specific loan programmes. I know that the American Small Business Administration has the ability to lend $100,000 at 5·5 per cent for periods up to 30 years. This is the sort of money that has to be made available to businesses in Australia if the general health of the economy is to be of the standard it ought to be. I invite honorable members to compare that assistance with the bank-owned hirepurchase companies which, I am told, are charging 21 per cent and 24 per cent effective interest on hire-purchase transactions. The American Small Business Administration will lend money on equipment, trucks and machinery to enable businessmen to get by or to develop their business. Can one imagine the Victorian Government lending money on that sort of collateral? The small businessman looking for support is forced into the area of hire-purchase finance, and under these conditions he has no hope of succeeding.

The American Small Business Administration, to my mind, appears to be the best in the world. To support


this contention one only has to look at America and see its magnificent private enterprise, its productivity and the stimulation which is given to it. If a country can do so well in this field there must be something in its policies of assistance to people in industries and small manufacturing businesses.

Economic loans are provided to enable the disadvantaged to have the capability and desire to carry on their own business and to become part of the economic life of the nation. The administration expects the operator to back his judgment by having a fair stake in the business. In other words, he has to put up a fair share of his own money. That is a reasonable proposition because without financial involvement there will be irresponsibility. The administration also looks at the character of the person borrowing the money, and the proposition he puts up, and it assesses his ability to become a viable operator.

If Victoria had Government commitment to stimulate small business, it would be the best guarantee for consumer competition, which is so necessary. It would keep everybody on his toes. But there has to be fair competition, and this is where the Government has a real part to play. It can give the small businessman a fair share of the business offeringI am speaking of Government business-so that he can tender for certain contracts. A proportion of tender business should be reserved to a section of small business rather than allow it to be beaten down by larger competitors.

A figure of 5 per cent has been suggested in certain cases, but I know of no company in Australia or in Victoria-despite the fact that the Government introduced this policy of 5 per cent in the last election campaign and in the previous election campaign-that has ever received it. I would be interested to know if any members of the Government could tell me whether this has happened.


Mr. Mclnnes.

Mr. McINNES: Before the suspension of the sitting I was saying that for far too long Governments in this country have neglected true private enterprise and have developed a code of get big or get out. But, no matter how big an Australian company is, there are always bigger organizations in the world which are backed by financial resources which have been accumulated over hundreds of years. We too frequently find that an Australian enterprise is swallowed up by a larger undertaking.

As a result of this, Australian enterprise is often condemned to a supportive or secondary role. In Australia we have Vestey's in the meat industry, Bunge (Australia) Pty. Ltd. in bread manufacturing, Lever Brothers, and General MotorsHolden Pty. Ltd. These are large companies but they are dependent in their local operations on Government support, and they duly receive it. I reported to the House the other night that every employee in the car manufacturing industry is subsidized to the tune of $4,000 a year.

An unfortunate effect of this is that there is too often a polarization of philosophy. There is the large corporation on the one hand, and large employee organization on the other. Both are strong in their field. I have often wondered whether this result is deliberately brought about. The large corporate employer has economy of scale and the unions may believe that it is easier to pick off one large employer than a multiplicity of small ones. This results in general con census between two parties which people might believe are poles apart. The rest of the community are the meat in the sandwich but it is they who suffer when there is a confrontation between these two strong elements.

Even the largest corporation is still made up of individuals who control its day-to-day operations. The power of an individual within a large corporation is protected by its very size. However, the petty abuse of that


power occasionally places the future of a small manufacturer at great risk. At a personal level there may be a simple falling out between the purchasing officer of a large company and the owner of a small manufacturing business who is trying to get on his feet. There might be a simple misunderstanding or a slight one, real or imagined.

Often, the use of this power of a large corporation results in the calling off of contracts of a small manufacturer or sub-contractor, with the result that he is doomed, although he may not even understand what went wrong. I have seen this happen. There can be dire results when a person has put all of his resources into an enterprise, believing that there would be good business for him, after being told that if he did certain things a large corporation would do other things. He could suddenly find that the company no longer wanted to use his services.

He would then be in a more difficult situation than an employee who could say, perhaps, "Good luck, Jack", and move to another area of employment. If a contractor to a large company is geared to produce a single item or line of equipment, in this situation he could find himself in a precarious position. How often does it happen that such a person, who has mortgaged himself heavily to acquire the plant and equipment to produce items required by a large emporium, suddenly finds that he has no business? This is an area of business which the Government could oversee in the interest of fair play, and this should be part of the duty of the corporation which is being set up by this Bill.

Many small firms have been ruined in the circumstances of which I have spoken. The new corporation should have teeth so that it can act as an ombudsman for business. It is often found that, as a result of the unscrupulous action of some highly paid corporate lawyer-and large companies can afford to avail themselves

of this sort of expertise-a small organization has no recourse if a contract is cancelled. The corporation set up by the Bill should be able to take some action in such a case. If it has no other course, when a large corporation acts unethically, it should bring it into public disrepute.

The Bill identifies a small business as one which is wholly owned and operated by an individual person or persons or by a proprietary company within the meaning of the Companies Act 1961. It qualifies this definition by providing that a small business is one which has a relatively small share of the market in which it competes and one which is managed personally by the owners or directors. That is a fair interpretation but I believe a complement of 100 employees is too la'rge for a "small business". In the early stages I believe the corporation will be very much concerned with the 5, 6, or fO-man businesses.

Different opinions have been expressed on whether the proposed Act should be administered by the Department of Labour and Industry or the Department of State Development and Decentralization. We support the proposition that its administration should come under the Department of State Development and Decentralization. as it will. Implicit in the proposal to encourage and support small businesses is the principle of decentralization.

Large corporations are vital to our economy. They provide a nucleus for a whole range 'of sub-contractors and service businesses. But there is a tendency for them to be established on the edge of the metropolitan area and for them to look inward for manpower and sub-contractors. I hope that, as the Small Business Development Corporation will be under the Department of State Development and Decentralization, there will be real State development in the sense that the Government will encourage private enterprise to decentralize. There should be regional


surveys which identify business resources peculiar to particular areas so that it could be said a certain type of industry-perhaps, a cem'ent plant-should be established in a particular area. The commercial world should then be encouraged to establish main industries in particular areas and so encourage the setting up of sub-contractors' businesses around them.

The oil industry is important in Gippsland South. Something like 400 sub-contractors service the prime business. The Latrobe Valley offers an example of this type of organization with the State Electricity Commission using raw materials. With oil and gas, Esso-B.H.P. is another example. Because of their size and importance such companies have no problem in attracting trained and highly qualified staff who live in the country. This is a type of project which the Government should promote.

With the reservations I have expressed these corporations have generally been good community neighbours. They have played their part in broadening and stabilizing the local economy, and the diversity of the cultural, educational, and technical backgrounds of their employees frequently adds a new dim'ension to the social awareness of the regions they serve.

The Bill refers to an information and referral centre. I hope there will not be only one, although that is the interpretation I put on the reference to the centre. Information centres should be brought as close to the people who will use them as is possible. The Government has not done much for small businesses. I direct attention to the effects of payroll tax and particularly of workers compensation. In one manufacturing organization in Sale with 45 employees the cost of workers compensation rose from $17,000 to $37,000 in on'e year.

Mr. HOLDING: That is because of the incompetence of the Government.

Mr. Mclnnes.

Mr. MclNNES: That is right. The Government has a total lack of understanding of the effects of its actions on these people. It acts to put a small patch here and a small patch there on its legislation but it does not tackle the underlying problems and their causes.

Mr. MACLELLAN: What would you do about it?

Mr. MclNNES: The National Party is not the Government but it is happy to offer advice. What the Governmentcould do is to take notice of what my party says ; I am pleased to say that it frequently does. Legislative measures frequently bear the earmarks of the suggestions of the National Party.

Professor Meredith, who I believe is one of the foremost authorities on this subject in Australia, has said that the neglect and failure during the first five years of operation has been due largely to lack of knowledge, inadequate forecasting and feasibility studies in examining business and very frequently unfair and ruthless competition. If this Bill goes part of the way in overcoming those deficiencies, it is certainly welcome. However, the National Party looks forward to future amending legislation to strengthen and support the initiatives established so that smaller Victorian business enterprises will get their fair share which has been so long coming to them.

Mr. KENNETT (Burwood): I support the Bill because, contrary to what the Leader of the Opposition said, I believe it is an area of real initiative taken by this Government. It has the opportunity of being the most singularly effective piece of legislation introduced in this session.

In deference to what the Leader of the Opposition said-that it will not be well supported, or well received by industry and business generally-my experiences over the past few weeks in discussing the measure with business and industry leads me to the view that it will be


well accepted. As the Leader of the Opposition said, at least it is a step in the right direction. It may not be complete legislation, but it does set up the framework for a constructive contribution in assisting an area of business which urgently needs assistance. If it is only a step in the right direction, then surely it is well worth taking, and in the years ahead the Government will ensure that it is viable legislation.

Mr. EDMUNDS: Do you support the Bill?

Mr. KENNETT: Without a doubt. The measure will present a unique opportunity to streamline. Considerable consultation has taken place with the various sectors for which the Government is legislating, namely, business and industry as well as governmental bodies. The multiplier agencies have been heavily and constantly consulted on the Bill.

As a personal comment, I stress that the multiplier agencies represent bodies of numerous persons and organizations, but the administration of those agencies, of their own volition and because of their interests, has been taken away from the management of their industry. In future, members of this-the Governmentside of the House must be careful to ensure that when it is set up the corporation does not call only on representatives whose names are submitted from the multiplier agencies, but goes further and obtains representation from people actually involved and responsible for the management of business. Obviously, the composition of the corporation is of vital importance. It must include areas of management. The strengths of this legislation, as with so many other pieces of legislation, will be judged on the way it is eventually administered and implemented.

The Leader of the Opposition has suggested that the Bill does not go very far and that some areas of the community may be disappointed. Members on this side of the House will ensure, with the support of

members of the Opposition, who claim to represent persons who are employed in small businesses, that this legislation will do as much as possible in offering the sort of assistance that members of the Government party think it ought to provide.

Implementation of the Bill will necessitate considerable finance to make it viable. It will also be necessary to make sure that the setting up of the corporation does not appear to further fragment support for the free enterprise sector. If well promoted, the measure will form a catalyst for the free enterprise sector, particularly those in small business who are in need and looking for some kind of assistance.

Basically, the Bill sets up a referral organization. The honorable member for Gippsland South and the Leader of the Opposition have placed great emphasis on finance. I suggest that what small business, medium sized businesses and even big business, in some instances, need is not so much financial assistance, although certainly some of them do, but assistance in administration, ethics and an understanding of Acts and regulations passed by this Parliament and other Parliaments, and generally a better understanding in certain fields of expertise which, because of the very nature and the size of their business, they do not contain within their own organizations.

The Leader of the Opposition has suggested that no provision is made for on-going finance. It is not the intention of the measure, and certainly not the intention of the multiplier groups and those in industry who have already been consulted, that there should be on-going finance. The Government is trying to set up an organization which will provide referral facilities, expertise and shortterm finance to enable businesses, particularly small businesses, to get back on their feet and be viable.

Regardless of the interjections from members of the Opposition, I believe the main aim of this measure


is to provide security of employment for people such as myself who are employed in the area of small business. Members on the Government side of the House do not for one moment believe that the Bill is setting up a system to ensure profits for those who are not prepared to take risks. Such a measure would not reach the floor of the House.

Members of my party are looking for two things-security of employment and the opportunity to restore this country to some degree of productivity. The area of productivity, to my mind, is the most important aspect of the measure. Over the past few years, this country has been subjected to the most incredible rate of inflation and abuse of power. We now have an incredible inflation rate and problems within industry.

This measure will go a long way towards re-establishing the only possible method of putting this country back on its feet-re-establishing and rebuilding productivity of not only small and medium businesses, but also big business. I cannot understand how members of the Opposition can continue to interject because their action merely demonstrates their lack of knowledge on this subject. Members of the Labor Party maintain that they represent the working man. Small business employs 42 per cent of the work force, and if the Public Service, which employs 25 per cent is disregarded, small business is by far the largest employer of human resources in this country. Notwithstanding this, the Opposition continues to ridicule the efforts of this Government to secure the employment of those whom the Opposition claims to represent.

I believe that the Bill will be well supported by industry, well publicized and activated and that the Government will continue to update the legislation. It will be vastly different from the legislation introduced by the last Federal Labor Government. The Small Business Bureau which was

Mr. Kennett.

set up by that Government operated in the only area in which the Federal Labor Government instituted some restraints, because it simply set up the organization without finance and without the ability to operate in its own right. This will not occur with the Bill now before the House.

As I said previously, it is a step in the right direction and, despite what the Leader of the Opposition says, it does have the support of industry. The Government will continually check on the performances of the corporation. I highly commend the Bill to the House and also to industry to support it when it receives the Royal assent. In conclusion, I suggest that the Opposition should look very closely at its criticism as the Bill sets out to protect people whom members of the Opposition suggest they represent.

Mr. EDMUNDS (Ascot Vale) : The Opposition is indebted to the honorable member for Burwood for his dissertation on how this measure will cure the ills of small, medium and big business. Members of my party were vaguely intrigued how this will be done because the Bill provides that the Governor in Council will appoint five persons who shall administer the relevant corporation and that from time to time the Governor in Council may remove the chairman and do all sorts of things concerning the corporation, including paying them. The problems of small business cannot be cured by any Government by means of a Bill of dimensions such as this. I should be interested to hear members of the Government party's Bill committee describe how this Bill came into being. Was it as a result of the Premier's making wild assertions and promises on the hustings to assist the broad area of private enterprise? The Bill actually does nothing.

Clause 13 provides for the establishment of a Small Business Advisory Agency. Since 1955 this Government must have established hundreds of advisory agencies to which one can go if one wishes to


ascertain what is going on in one's particular sphere. For instance, in the housing advisory centre one man handles inquiries about housing problems. The functions of the Small Business Advisory Agency will be-

(a) to establish a centre to be known as the Information and Referral Centre;

(b) to investigate the effect upon small business of the policies of Governments, of Acts of Parliament (whether of the States or of the Commonwealth) and of rules, regulations, by-laws and other laws made thereunder;

(c) to arrange training and educational programmes for small business;

(d) to publish and distribute information for the guidance of small business;

(e) to arrange financial assistance to small businesses and to make recommendations to the Treasurer with respect to applications for Government guarantees under this Act.

How can any Government during its first session immediately after an election introduce a Bill such as this which will do nothing to solve the problems that are associated with a small business that is trying to compete against big business?

Let us consider an example of a business in Puckle Street, an area with which you, Mr. Speaker, and I are familiar. If a large organization such as Highpoint West decides to establish itself in the area, does the small businessman, who probably lives in Mount Martha but who obtains his income from Puckle Street, go to the Small Business Advisory Agency and obtain information and referral? Goodness knows what that means. Can he then ask this referral centre to investigate his particular problems? The honorable member for Burwood has been in the House only five minutes and is very enthusiastic about what the Government is doing, but I can remember hearing of him before he entered this place. He said he was intending to tune-up the Premier.

I pose the hypothetical case of the small businessman in Puckle Street who has problems of competition from Highpoint West and who goes to the centre and receives infor-

mation. He says that his margins have been chopped and that he cannot sell certain products. What does the agency do? It states that it will investigate the effect on small business of the policies of the Government. Can anybody seriously suggest that the five members appointed by the Governor in Council will examine what is happening in the competitive field of private enterprise and seriously make a recommendation that will help the small business in Puckle Street? The short answer is, "No". Or will it disc'Over that some by-laws or regulations are affecting the small business?

The next proposal is that this agency will retrain the small businessman and provide educational programmes for him. Where will this retraining occur? Will the Minister of Public Works have a building erected for that purpose? The Government suggests that the small businessman, having failed to compete against the Swiss Bank or whoever has put his money into Highpoint West, will be retrained under educational programmes for small business. I should like to hear from the Premier or anyone down to the Minister of Public Works how the small businessman will be taken out of his business. Does the Governmen t propose 'Organizing a night school and, if so, where will it be organized? Will it be at a technical school and, if so, which one?

This matter has been tossed backwards and forwards and obviously the Government has not thought through all the difficulties associated with the Bill. The agency will publish and distribute informati'On for the guidance of small businesses. Honorable members have seen the dial of the former Minister for State Development and Decentralization on everything that was printed during his term of office. It must have cost a fortune to have that done but it has not produced a skerrick of go'Od for Victoria.


Finally, the agency will arrange financial assistance for small business and make recommendations to the Treasurer on applications for Government guarantees under this Bill. I do not believe the members of the Government committee who put this Bill together have thought their way through it. They have seriously attempted to put into Bill form what the Premier promised the electorate generally some time ago when the honorable gentleman said he intended doing something for small business.

This is legislating for the sake of legislation. It will not 'achieve one skerrick of good. The Opposition does not oppose the measure because it would be foolish to do so if there is a chance that it may have any effect. However, if one examines this Bill, as the Opposition has done and tries to analyse its results, on~ will conclude that it is a negative measure which, I suggest to the honorable member for Burwood, the Government will never proclaim. It will be another piece of legislation which will be passed in this session and about which the Premier will be able to make a speech on Friday to be broadcast on Sunday about what the Government has been up to since it has been re-elected. In my opinion, which I consider to be valuable, particularly in this House, the Bill is absolutely valueless.

The Government probably takes the view that the Bill has been introduced and debated, but I suggest that there will be no other speakers for the Government party because its members are embarrassed about it. On the Government benches are represented all sections of business within the community-small, medium and big business-and if anyone of those sections is able to obtain any solace from this Bill, I should like to hear from it. The honorable member for Burwood and the Minister who introduced the measure have not described itadequately, nor has it been proved to

Mr. Edmunds.

the OppOSition that the Bill has any merit and that it is not legislation for legislation's sake.

Mr. COLUNS (Noble Park) : I wish to speak briefly on this Bill. Clause 13 (2) (e) provides that the Small Business Advisory Agency shall arrange financial assistance to small businesses. I can mention two industries in Victoria whiCh would be helped by this provision and which I imagine some members of the Opposition have not considered.

The first industry deals with the construction and installation of traffic intersection control devices. In V!ctoria at present only two organIzatIOns carry out this work. I have heard much criticism of the Road Safety and Traffic Authority and of the Metcon system which is a good system. Th~ authority has a new chairman and many innovations are planned f~r the future. However, a third producer 'and constructor of traffic intersection control devices is required. Already about 600 of these devices need to be manufactured. If a third producer were introduced to the system it would have to be a small business because the two present manufacturers are major organizations. The need exists for a third manufacturer. If the Opposition disagrees with that I should like to hear from it.

The second industry that could be helped by the Government would be the sewerage industry. I refer to contractors for reticulation works within the Board of Works area and other areas. There is a distinct shortage of competent sewerage reticulation contractors, a fact which I can confirm from my brief experience as chairman of a sewerage authority. At the end of 1974 the previous Federal Government made available money, and the authority of which I was chairman received 'a telegram stating that it should spend $400,000 by 30th June, $289,000 of which was a loan from the Federal Government.


The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler) : Order! I can hardly relate to this Bill what the honorable member is now stating. The honorable member is speaking about sewerage contracts and reticulation, which are not relevant to the measure. I ask him to return to the Bill.

Mr. COLLINS: Small business contractors engaged in the sewerage industry, and there are a number of these, particularly young people starting out, need financial assistance. At present great difficulty is being experienced in obtaining more than two or three tenders for connection of sewerage to houses, whereas five or ten years ago at least twenty people would tender for each job. Prices have escalated and consequently the householder is paying more. A number of young people who are trying to enter this small business need help and certainly advice. Without appropriate advice they are going broke rapidly because their tendering is not satisfactory, to say the least. Then their workmanship suffers, and the whole job has to be done aCY,ain. There is a need for advice from people who understand, and certainly a need for assistance.

The Opposition and those who doubt the validity of the Bill should have a look at small business. Unemployment is a serious problem in my electorate and neighbouring electorates, so this measure is of tremendous importance. If it will help the situation of small businesses, I wholeheartedly support the Bill.

Mr. JASPER (Murray Valley): I commend the Government on the introduction of this Bill, and recognize the tremendous importance of small business to the State of Victoria. I believe that private enterprise is a basic element in our democratic society. A large part of the wealth of this nation is created by the initiative and drive that is displayed by private enterprise, and this is typified by small business.

Small business is the most productive sector of the economy; at present small businessmen work the longest hours and receive the least reward of all. When one estimates that there are 280,000 small businesses throughout Australia, it can be understood how important this sector is.

The Bill provides for the setting up of a Small Business Advisory Agency, and I am pleased to see that clause 12 authorizes the corporation-to do all things necessary to be done for or in connexion with encouraging, promoting, facilitating, and assisting in the establishment, carrying on, expansion, and development of small business.

This is a most important area, and the corporation will be able to work in it to assist small business.

However, the National Party considers that the Bill does not have enough teeth. I agree with the Leader of the Opposition that in its present form the measure will not be effective enough. A large percentage of business is already efficient and wellmanaged, but the biggest problem is in-cost pressures from wages and associated expenses together with costs imposed by Government. I shall refer to two or three areas in regard to this aspect.

The first is workers compensation. I highlight the difficulties of workers compensation by mentioning the costs of two or three businesses in the Murray Valley electorate. A fruitgrowing and packing industry at Cobram which employs 50 people paid $10,000 in workers compensation premiums twelve months ago. That figure has now increased this year to $22,000. Another fruitgrowing and packing industry in Cobram also dealing with potatoes, onions and pumpkins last year paid $20,000 in workers compensation premiums, compared with $37,000 this year. A timber mill close to my home town which employs seven people last year paid workers compensation premiums of $7,200, compared with $22,800 this year.


The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): This is not a debate on workers compensation.

Mr. JASPER: I think it is quite relevant, Mr. Speaker. That business closed down simply because of the cost of workers compensation. This is one area that the proposed corporation should investigate and do something about.

In my maiden speech I referred to pay-roll tax exemptions, which is another area that the corporation could examine with a view to assisting small business. Under the present system where pay-rolls under $6,066 receive some exemption from this tax, a business employing more than 10 and up to 100 people is still regarded as a small business and would probably pay a huge amount of pay-roll tax. The changes made to the Act in November last year meant that any small business, except those employing fewer than ten people, still paid the same amount of pay-roll tax as previously.

Mr. MACLELLAN: Except decentralized industry.

Mr. JASPER: I agree that decentralized industries have received some assistance, but it is not enough. The multitude of Government returns also levy a heavy impost on small business. The Small Business Development Corporation should investigate this aspect, because although large companies have special sections to deal with returns, in small businesses usually the proprietor or owner of the business handles these returns.

The corporation could also use its influence to persuade the Federal Government to reduce company tax, because this taxation on small companies is outrageous. A large company such as Broken Hill Proprietary Co. Ltd., after paying its company tax to the Government, may retain all the remaining profit, if it wishes, but a small private company must pay tax on half the undistributed profits. The corporation could also help to reduce telephone charges. Country business-

es are badly affected by these charges, and I was pleased that the Leader of the Opposition mentioned country businesses in small towns which at present, because of the rural crisis, are actually funding primary producers.

The proposed corporation will need to receive immediate allocations of funds. It will not be effective unless it has money. It should immediately receive money to use for low-interest loans to assist small businesses. It is not just talk that they need, but large amounts of finance.

The principles of operation of the corporation will need to be laid down, especially over the first twelve months. Unless this is done immediately and specifically, thousands of small businesses will go out of operation and may never resume. The Bill is a step in the right direction, and the National Party wishes to see more teeth in it so that it can effectively assist small business.

NIr. WILKES (Northcote) : The Bill does not do anything to help small business.

Mr. MACLELLAN : But you are going to support it.

Mr. WILKES: Of course; the Opposition does not oppose the Bill. It is a clear indication of an attempt by a panic-stricken private enterprise Government to prop up a system for whose failure it is responsible. I refer to the argument of the honorable member for Murray Valley. If the Government wanted to do anything to materially help small business in Victoria today-and there is no doubt about the plight of small businessit should ask what are the main problems confronting them. The problems are lack of markets and lack of sales. The Prime Minister has been telling people to buy, buy, buy, and he has been joined by the Treasurer saying that there should be a stimulation of sales. How can a sale stimulation situation be achieved when a Government such as the one in Canberra today is in power?


The Federal Government is prepared to apply cut-backs in areas that are the direct antithesis of encouraging the sales expendi~ure boo~ that is needed by small busmesses In this State. Where has there been any suggestion of tax concessions for small businesses? Where has there been any proposition by the Government-certainly not in this measureto introduce pay-roll tax concessions? Would not pay-roll tax concessions be an inducement or assistance to small business? Why does not the Victorian Government make an effort? Has there been any suggestion in this proposed legislation that gives any confidence to the public sector? Of course there has been no such suggestion. By interjection the honorable member for Burwood says, "Yes ", and I ask him where that appears. The honorable member has not read the Bill.

The Bill provides for the setting up of the corporation by window dressing the situation. The Opposition is concerned about the plight of small business in Victoria.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): Order! While the honorable member for Burwood, who is interjecting, was delivering his address, I gave him all the protection possible. I ask him to cease interje~ting while other members make theIr contributions to the debate.

Mr. WILKES: Thank you for your protection, Mr. Speaker. The Bill proposes to do one very small thing, and that is to set up a corporation to establish a centre to be known as the Information and Referral Centre. What does that mean? Does it mean that if a business in a Melbourne suburb runs into difficulties because a big corporation such as a supermarket, the Myer Emporium Ltd. or G. J. Coles and Co. Ltd. have set up alongside it, it can say to the corporation, "Here are my problems", and the corporation would say, "You have two alternatives; go to the loan sharks and borrow a few dollars at 20 per cent interest, or go to the

bank and borrow a few bob at 14 per cent "? That does not solve the problem.

The Bill does not state that any restriction is to be placed on the enterprise that is causing the problem for a small business except to the extent that if a person is selling cheap beer, it will refer that matter to the Liquor Control Commission and ~stablish a price maintenance authorIty to ensure that small businesses cannot sell cheap liquor. Is this the idea of the Bill? Is this the idea of the corporation? Honorable members are entitled to know the answer.

The Government cannot have it both ways. If it is going to organize price maintenance in one area, how is it going to assist small businessmen who are trying to make ends meet by cutting the price of beer against that charged by hotels or large retailers? Clause 13 (2) (b) of the Bill states that the functions of the agency shall be, inter aUa-to investigate the effect upon small business of the policies of Governments, of Acts of Parliament (whether of the States or of the Commonwealth) and of rules, regulations, by-laws and other laws made thereunder. No rules or regulations have ever been laid down by this Government or any Commonwealth Government, of whatever political colour, to assist small business when it has been in trouble, and I want to know how the present Victorian Government is going to do so. That is absurd; it is window-dressing. It is side-stepping the problems of small business in this State.

The Bill states further that the agency is prepared to arrange training and educational programmes for small business. How does one tell small business that if it is losing money, it can improve its position? If it has alongside it a supermarket or a large manufacturer with all the resources tha t can be provided by that large enterprise, how does one by instruction encourage or assist small business to survive in this situation? We should all be interested to know.


We have not been informed of this by the Premier~ and the Bill does not indicate it in any way. The clause goes on to state that the agency will publish and distribute information for the guidance of small business. Does that suggest that small businesses will be told how to operate their own enterprises? This is a free-enterprise Government! I would not expect it to tell private business how it should run its affairs. That is not what small businesses in difficulties want. They want more tangible assistance from the Government. They want restored confidence in the economy. That is not provided by this Government or by its counterpart in Canberra. Finally~ paragraph (e) provides that it shall be a function of the agency-

To arrange financial assistance to small businesses and to make recommendations to the Treasurer with respect to applications for Government guarantees under this Act.

What does the expression "Government guarantees" mean? If a business in a country centre~ a suburban area or anywhere else in Victoria is in difficulties~ does this advisory body inform it that it cannot supply it with temporary finance to get it over its difficulties but that as an alternative the business should go to a money lender and pay 20 per cent interest or to a bank and pay 14 per cent~ if it can obtain it? The Government has not said which one it will guarantee. Because of the commercial immorality that exists in Victoria and has existed since the Liberal Government has been in office, I have noQ doubt that even this Government will be concerned about where the money comes from and whether it will guarantee a loan from a finance company at 20 per cent. However, that is the assistance the Government proposes to give to small businesses.

Clause 15 provides, inter alia-(1) The Treasurer of Victoria after con

sidering a report from the Corporation may execute a guarantee in favour of any person or persons (whether corporate or unincorporate) for the repayment of liabilities incurred or to be incurred in respect of any small business.

Mr. Wilkes.

(2) The following provisions shall apply to and in respect of any guarantee under this section :-

(a) The guarantee may include any interest charges and expenses chargeable by the creditor against the debtor and the expenses of enforcing or obtaining or endeavouring to enforce or obtain payment of the debt guaranteed and those interest charges and expenses;

The clause then cites three other illustrations, but the meat in the sandwich is as follows-

(d) The creditor shall not without the consent in writing of the Corporation assign or encumber the benefit of the guarantee.

(3) (a) An application for a guarantee under this Act shall be made in writing to the Corporation.

(b) The applicant shall furnish the Corporation with all information required by the Corporation in relation to the business in respect of which the guarantee is required.

The Treasurer of Victoria shall at all times say whether in fact a guarantee will apply.

Mr. MACLELLAN: We have been doing that for years with housing without your support.

Mr. WILKES: We are not talking about co-operative housing societies, building societies or housing under the State's housing assistance scheme; we are talking about small businesses. How does the ,Minister and the Government propose to carry out meaningful proposals under this proposed legislation?

Mr. MACLELLAN: In the same way as we have in the past.

Mr. WILKES: The House has heard the honorable members for Burwood and Noble Park. I congratulate the honarable member for Noble Park. He at least attempted to defend the Government and its proposed legislation~ but we have not heard what the effects of this measure will be on a company which 'is in difficulties and which does not comply with any of the conditions set out in clause 15, other than to receive advice to borrow money from a money lender or a bank. That is not what small businesses want. They want


some guarantee that they will be supported by Government policy, not by corporations or advisory bodies. They want tangible support. The Government guarantee will not satisfy small businesses because many could not afford to be sustained by that method. Small businesses in the State want guaranteed markets. These can be brought about by Government policy-if not by this Government, certainly by the Commonwealth Government in certain areas.

I am referring to small business in the sense of manufacturing industry. As the honorable member for Burwood rightly pointed out, small manufacturing industry makes up the largest proportion of business in the commercial spectrum of the State. That is what we are talking about. If one section of the industry is depressed, it is small business. If the building industry generally is depressed, small businesses in that industry are depressed. That is dependent on Government policy, and all the advisory bodies in the world that the Government sets up cannot make up for a stimulation in the building industry to cover the situation. Today small industry is looking for a lead from this Government, and there should be a lead. If the Government cannot write this into legislation, it should indicate in its policies that it is prep'ared to organize a stimulated programme and a stimulated policy in the public sector which will be reflected in the private sector to give small businesses and industry the stimuli that they require today. Everyone knows that the building industry is slack. That is only one industry.

Mr. MACLELLAN: I am glad the honorable member is supporting the Bill.

Mr. WILKES: My colleagues and I are supporting some policies that are obscure to us at present. We are not opposing the Bill, because it purports to be the vehicle which will assist small business. The Minister's mind is so full of the dead and decay-

ing philosophies of the Liberal Party that he would not know the problems of small business in this State.

As the Leader of the Opposition says, there has been no indication, no encouragement and no enthusiasm in this measure or by any policy statements of the Government that it intends to stimulate those small depressed industries in the State that are affected by recent unemployment. That is what it is all about. It is all very well for Ministers to introduce Bills to set up advisory panels and to provide for guaranteed loans, The Government does not say to what extent. It gives no indication of an intention to do anything beyond that. Industry is calling out for a lead from some responsible Government and it is not getting it from this Government, or in this rubbishy Bill. The Government has the opportunity and the wherefor to give the lead in stimulating the building industry. It is obvious from its policy that it does not intend to do that. This Bill will not take up the slack in the building industry. Many small businesses are dependent on the buoyancy of that industry. That is only one area. If the Government expects to get any credit from industry in this State, whether big or small, we do not see where that will come about.

Members of the Opposition are not opposing the Bill, although there is no evidence of any real attempt by the Government to do anything about depressed industry in the State, whether in Melbourne or in country areas. We have seen what the Government has done in the past for decentralized industry. There is a new Minister for State Development and Decentralization, and we notice that his photograph has not appeared as frequently as that of the former Minister on publications, but we are not surprised that this measure does not carry a photograph of the present Minister. The Government should do much more than it has done in this field. Industry cannot expect to gain any solace from what the Government intends to do by setting up an advisory ad hoc committee.

772 Small Business Development L ASSEMBLY.] Corporation Bill.

Mr. MACKINNON (Box Hill): By your leave, Mr. Speaker, before I commence to speak to the Bill I should like to refer briefly to my predecessors in the electorate of Box Hill. The former member for Box Hill is now present in a new guise as the member for Doncaster. The seat of Box Hill encompasses part of the old seat of Box Hill, which also included a large area of Doncaster, and also encompasses part of the old seat of Mi1cham. I pay tribute to Mrs. Goble, the former member for Mitcham, for the wonderful work she did as a member of this House.

I am pleased to be able to speak to this Bill in my first address to the House because Box Hill is one of those centres which are concerned with small business. I have spoken on this subject t'O some extent in the area. The first point to consider is the importance of small business. Most honorable members will have heard that small business employs 42 per cent of the work force. That in itself might be regarded as a most important aspect. It is surprising that so little has been done in Australia in this matter, but it goes much further. Economic considerations must also be examined.

I visualize small business as providing the dynamism for the type of economy we look for in this country. It is the heart of private enterprise and it provides that vital force. Sociologically we should recognize that people should have the opportunity of participating in the type of work to which they are best suited. Doubtless my colleagues in the National Party will agree that the farmer is one. There are many independent-minded people in this world, and the last thing they want to do is to work in a bureaucracy. Many people would consider working in a large firm to be the last thing they would want to do. They wish to be independent and to set themselves up independen tly.

In the years to come Australia should perhaps be the centre, so to speak, of the very best in small businesses. I say this because Aus-

tralia is relatively small in population and the major centres are widely dispersed, which creates problems. It is difficult to imagine that many of Australia's businesses will become more than small or medium-sized businesses. I cannot think of a better place for medium-sized businesses to grow from than from the small business area.

What is the problem we are facing? One aspect that particularly struck me was the failure rate. I am not referring only to the problems of the economy because they are a different matter, but there is a very high failure rate in small business. I suppose this is what business is all about. We are talking about high risks and getting rewards for ourselves. It has been suggested that we were not looking at tax concessions in the right way. Nevertheless, the risks have to be rewarded, but we should be taking great care to mitigate the risks.

I shall quote from a report by a Mr. Williams. I am not referring to the honorable member for Doncaster. Mr.Williams analysed 863 failures and he points out that they resulted in 6,943 individuals becoming unemployed and causing financial difficulties to a reported 9,497 creditors. There are also the difficulties, as stated in the report, of the indignity, economic loss and psychological suffering of 1,126 families. So failure of any business has a strong multiplying effect throughout society. Anything we can do to reduce the incidence of failure must be done because it means much more than just the failure of the business itself. It has an impact on the whole community.

This is one of the prime purposes of the Bill. I believe it is central to it. It is not necessary to save businesses that have got themselves into difficulties. Today we are looking ahead. We are trying to save businesses before they get into difficulties. We are trying to make


sure that people who go into business will do so with the greatest assurance of success. We must recognize that today we cannot really expect people to succeed readily in business if they go into it in an amateur spirit. Enthusiasm is one thing, but one cannot really expect enthusiasm to carry someone through all the set-backs and problems that he will face. A person must have some skills and knowledge. If a person were to swim a river we would expect him to take a few lessons first. Some people will carry themselves through the problems that might arise with their resourcefulness and their strength of character. That is why business carries on as successfully as it does. That does not mean that everyone should not have lessons, but where do they get them, because at this stage there is no provision for them?

It has been queried by Opposition speakers whether small businessmen can be expected to avail themselves of the opportunities of education. Under present circumstances it may be difficult. It may be because it is not geared to the needs of small businesses that small businessmen or people in small business have not availed themselves of education and training opportunities.

A t this stage I shall refer to the Bill and look at some of the functions which it intends to carry out. It is an embracing set of functions and covers the theme, which cannot be said to be in depth at this stage, but is a broad structure. The first function as set out in the Bill is to form a small business corporation. That in itself could lead to tremendous innovations because if one thing is missing it is the voice of small business. It should not be beyond the capabilities of such a corporation to achieve this in some way. It may take a bit of evolution but it is not beyond the possibilities of this corporation to become the significant voice of small business in Victoria.

In this way it can carry its message with strength to the Commonwealth Government, and through to all the trade associations by way of directing them on how they should be looking after their members in the small business area. Also it can speak tD the Victorian Government with strength. One of the functions of the agency as set out in the Bill is tD establish a centre known as the Information and Referral Centre; that is an advisory bureau, as I understand it. That is the first step that is needed. There must be a centre that small business knows it can call on.

To be successful it will be necessary, once the information centre is fully manned and operative, for it to have sufficient promotional support. This will be an important factor, but I do not know how it will be achieved. It will be a real challenge. It is no good having an information centre that nD one knows about. It must be one that is prominent and about which the small businessman knows. To get to the small businessman in this way is not easy because he is probably at home working 'On his accounts and he does not know that the centre exists. The next aspect of the agency is to investigate the effect of the policies of the Government upDn small business. This is one of the most fundamental aspects of the Bill.

It is most important that small business is not overlooked. As I said, it has not a true voice. I doubt whether any farmer feels in any way that his point of view is overlooked. I doubt whether any unionist's point of view is overlooked in any way. I do not believe that small businesses want to be overlooked. This will be important in that sense. It will be up to small businesses to take full advantage of this to organize themselves in some way to make sure their voice is brought forth.

Clause 13 (2) (c) of the Bill refers to the corporation arranging training and educational programmes for small


business. I hope these will be programmes that are attuned to the needs of small business. There are many programmes just set up by anybody which are superficial and get nowhere. There are the academicoriented programmes that are of no interest or use to anyone. Programmes of this type should be practical. Already many of the larger businesses have had a good deal of experience with small businesses where small businesses are working for the larger businesses as agents in one form or another. Perhaps some of their experience can be dra~ on.

When I refer to the publishing and distributing of information for the guidance of small business, the point I am making naturally follows from the above in a sense. I refer to the point that was made by the honorable member for Noble Park. I refer to people such as plumbers who wish to start their own plumbing contracting business. This is a case where it is not expected that a person will be thrown in to see whether he can swim, as I mentioned earlier. It is absolutely fundamental that people should be able to obtain some guidance on what are the basic principles that should be followed. If it is a question of knowing how to cost, this should be explained to them in a simple and effective form applicable to their business.

A lot of this information tends to be picked up as a person goes along. We must recognize that it is not the day of the amateur but the day of the professional. The sooner we enable people to become professional in their new job of running a small business the better.

Finally I come to the question of financial assistance. How to give financial assistance to small business is a very vexed question, largely because the availability of capital or access to funds is related to lack of liquidity. A person who has not enough funds himself is unable to borrow more. If a person wants more

Mr. Mackinnon.

capital put into his business he is faced with the problem of asking someone else to join him in partnership. Not everyone wishes to join forces with someone else, especially these people because they are of an independent mind. This is the part that creates the problem.

The other part of the problem is that in many cases they are not well versed in knowing how to set out their financial position and are unable to persuade other people of the validity of their case. This comes back to the point I made in some of the earlier parts of my speech. The opportunity should be provided for them to obtain professional expertise, so that they can set out their cases and make a special effort in this direction. From a financial point of view the whole question is related to access to funds.

The recommendation made in the Bill is that the State will be prepared to back its judgment in special cases rather than just back equity. That is a step in the right direction. There are other institutions in Australia that have already taken this step. Hopefully the Government will find some mechanism for helping the smaller of the small businesses. I can envisage this approach applying to the larger of the small businesses, but it may be more difficult in practice to apply it to the smaller of the small businesses without working out some technique and being involved in its implementation.

I am pleased that the Government has taken the step of establishing a Small Business Corporation. As I said earlier it is a step that I feel in Australia has been long overdue. An attempt was made earlier at the national level but it was not so successful. This is a measure which can be taken at the State level with much greater success. This is the proper level for this action to be taken and I am very pleased that it is being taken.

Mr. SIMMONDS (Reservoir): The House is being subjected to one of the great hoaxes of the Liberal


Party. It is about to sell a pup to the community about its concern for the small businessman. It is a party that is supported by and serviced by big businesses in Victoria. It is hardly likely that a party which supports big businesses would support the small businessman in a realistic manner.

If honorable members read the Bill they will see that its purpose is to establish a five man Governmentappointed body to solve the problems of small business in the declining economy. One would be forgiven for testing the sincerity of the Government in introducing this Bill.

If the Bill were to be effective it would have to contain some measures for protecting small business from big business. It will have to deal with the situation which is currently being inflicted upon not only small business but the working community in Victoria by the policies of its Federal colleafl;ues conrerning the car industry. Those people who are concerned with the establishment of employment and of opportunities for the development of hnth small and larger enterprises in Victoria must realize that to provide employment and the goods and services that are needed, these policies must be looked at to ascertain whether there is any possibility in cautioning the people of Victoria about the implementation of those policies.

Mr. KENNETT: Do you represent small and big unions?

Mr. SIMMONDS: The honorable member for Burwood, who has come into the House as a representative of private enterprise, is able to spend public money on people who would be described as small businessmen with whom he is prepared to identify himself.

In respect of the car industry :1

civic meeting was held in Geelong on 30th April to formulate a campaign against what was called the Fraser plan.

Mr. MACLELLAN: It is the same as the Labor Party plan.

Mr. SIMMONDS : I do not wish to argue about the definition of the plan. The Fraser plan is that there shall be 85 per cent Australian component in the car manufacturing industry. Of course, apart from the 85 per cent position, it has enabled a decision to be taken by car manufacturers in Victoria, despite the Victorian Governt:lent's claiming that they have an obligation in this area, to deal with the small enterprises which manufacture small component parts for the car industry, on the basis that a proportion of their production can be set off against overseas production so that the total production within the companies, own plant need only be 85 per cent. Previously, because of the non-reversion position the small component manufacturers in Victoria were protected against the viable operations of General Motors-Holden's Ltd. and the Ford Motor Company of Australia Ltd. so they could expect an opportunity to produce these small components in Victoria to service the car industry.

What will happen now following the 85 per cent decision is that those components which can be economically produced overseas will be imported from overseas and the production will be integrated into the global economic policy of the company manufacturing the cars in Australia and importing small components. This means that the job and employment opportunities for both large and small manufacturers of components servicing the car industry in this State will be restricted. The character and the structure of the work force in Victoria will undergo a significant change. More and more of these people who produce components in the small plants which service the car industry will be regulated to producing components which can be produced locally in terms of economic structure and not in terms of the need to support the Australian community.


The Government introduces legislation which purports to support what it calls small businesses, whereas in fact the Government is protecting multi-national businesses whose policies, regardless of the Government, are to the detriment of employees in large and small enterprises in Victoria. This is a reflection of the dominance of those companies over the policies of this Government.

I will cite an example. In Geelong, at Cooldrive, fourteen employees have been retrenched. The reason advanced by the company is a drop in orders for seat belts from the Ford company. The company has received information that Ford company has made applications to import the seat belts. Therefore, the Ford company is integrating its operations on the global scene, and being a multi-national company and in conformity with safety legislation to provide seat belts, is able to claim that on a world basis it can produce its seat belts in a more economic form overseas than it can produce them in small businesses in Victoria. The production of seat belts will not occur any longer in Victoria. That is an illustration of a multi-national company producing a product in the cheapest and most economic way to meet its immediate requirements.

I invite honorable members to look at what is happening in Victoria, to examine the generality of the position in relation to job opportunities and employment hopes. The position in the chemical industry has worsened considerably in recent months. I quote from the Employment Prospects by Industry and Occupation, for February, 1976-

There was a contraction in the annual rate of increase in employment in the chemical industry between July and October 1974, after which the level of employment started to decline at an increasing rate, through to its currently very depressed leve1.

The report then refers to the paint industry which is a supporting industry in this State, and the building industry, which is also in a state of decline. Because of the high prices

Mr. Simmonds.

of land, young people are unable to embark on the purchase of a home. Through the actions of the Liberal Government in Victoria, and the Fraser concept of federalism, there will be fewer funds available for land acquisition in this State to provide cheaper land.

If honorable members want to talk about small businesses, they should realize that small businesses are those which depend on home owners in this State. They are the people who depend on young persons being able to set up a matrimonial home and thus generate a consumer demand on which small businesses thrive.

This Bill would not be before this Chamber if there was not the phenomenon of an international downturn in the capitalist system. There is no difference in the position of employment and inflation in this country despite the change of Government nationally. There is a declining rate in expansion in the type of industries we have been talking about. Of course, the small business enterprises have no hope of expansion as they have to rely on a consumer rate of expansion, and this will not take place.

There must be a realization that our living standards have to be maintained. Our friends from the rural community will not accept that when farmers have to shoot their cattle because of the market price situation. They are not the people who will lead the consumer demand, not the people who will say they need new refrigerators or need to develop their farms as they are not in a position to generate the consumer demand. The future of the motor car industry in this State is that upwards of 10,000 people could be displaced from that industry if the Fraser plan which has been envisaged is carried out. What is envisaged is a complete reversal in this State of the utilization of resources and this will be determined by the capacity of the work force to maintain its purchasing power.

Small Business Development [ 11 MAY, 1976.] Corpor4'ltion Bill. 777

Our friends in the rural sector have been critical of the fact that the meat they produce can sell at $1 a pound in the market place. They are also critical of the fact that there are high labour-intensive aspects in this industry. When honorable members talk about labourintensive aspects, they should look at the working conditions of the employees in this industry, both large and small, and they will find that the cost of production in Melbourne works out at 4·5 cents a pound of meat.

I ask Government supporters how the small businessman who is a butcher can compete with the large chain to make a proper living when he is in the situation I am referring to. In respect of wages the cost factor in the slaughtering of cattle is only 4· 5 cents a pound and the price of the commodity sold at the farm gate is very low. I want to know what accounts for the difference between the price paid at the farm and the price paid by the consumer in Melbourne? Is it the small businessman who is trying to make a living or is there someone in between who is able to have a big and vital say in the affairs of this industry? If the Government was fair dinkum in its approach to small businesses, it would investigate the position and inform honorable members what the facts are.

The alternative which the Government has chosen is to introduce this measure under which it proposes to set up a body to investigate these matters. That body is to comprise five people but it is not given any resources or directions on how it is to support small businesses. How is it going to support the small family grocer who is trying to compete with Australian Safeway Stores Pty. Ltd.? How will it support the local milk bar which operates a mixed goods business and which is competing with S. E. Dickens Pty. Ltd. and Coles New World Supermarket?

When it comes to the test, how is the Liberal Party in Victoria to determine how it will service Safeways, New World, General Motors-Holden's Pty. Ltd., the Ford company and the small family business person in the community. It knows all the problems, but who is to deal with the end result of Government legislation in this State? Who is to deal with the problem of providing a proper national compensation scheme when the same party in the national Parliament opposes a national compensation scheme which reflects on the business community in this State as a result of that opposition? This has an influence on the work force employed in industries.

At Geelong, which is not entirely rural but is a provincial city, at present 5,000 workers are competing for 200 jobs. That is a situation which the Government has to overcome. As I have pointed out, the manufacture of seat belts will no longer be carried out in Geelong but overseas where it is cheaper. This will lead to Australians, and particularly Victorians, losing their jobs.

This Bill is an exercise in window dressing by a Government notorious for doing this. The Opposition is prepared to allow the Government to put in the shop window but it will tell the Government how to fill the shop window in the future.

Mr. REESE (Heatherton) : This has been a most interesting debate because of the contrasting attitudes put to the House. First of all, I congratulate the honorable member for Box Hill on his contribution in his maiden speech in this House. In other contributions I have heard some points which I believe are worthy of comment and I shall refer to some of them in passing.

For example, the honorable member for Reservoir started off with the comment that the Bill held the high hopes of the Liberal Party, that it was a measure that he supported but that the Government was the tool of big business. Is the latter statement


any more true than that he and his supporters are qualified to claim that they represent the workers in this country ?

The honorable member for Murray Valley covered a few points which are valid. In supporting the Bill he referred to the effect of workers compensation on small businesses. It is a tremendous burden. In fact it is a burden on every business and the Government has already taken action to carry out a full investigation into the problem of workers compensation and how it can be reduced.

The Government has already taken action on the incidence of pay-roll tax. Last year this Government realistically doubled the statutory exemption for pay-roll tax in an effort to ease the burden. No doubt in the future it will again examine the question of increasing the exemption. However, there is a need to find a replacement for that revenue, and no doubt the Treasurer will attend to that side of it.

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition made great play on those aspects of the Bill which refer to manufacturing indus-tries. In fact, he virtually said that the Bill was concerned only with manufacturing industry. There is nothing in the Bill to so indicate. He also referred to the problems of manufacturing industry brought about to a large extent by tariff decisions of his party in Canberra.

There are in the City of M'Oorabbin almost 2,000 registered factories. I can count on the fingers 'Of one hand those that would not come within the definition of small business in this Bill. Many of them are suffering tremendously by change~ in tariff policy which have emanated from Canberra in the past three years. Many are virtually reduced to being warehouses to keep their doors open because they cannot compete in the way they could before 1973. The Whitlam Government brought about that situation.

Mr. Reese.

It is most important that this Bill should be placed in its correct perspective. It sets up the broad pattern for establishment of the Small Business Development Corporation. It does not refer to a manufacturing business corporation. It is concerned with the owner-managed business. The definition in the Bill states clearly that it is concerned with the small business enterprise where the initiative of the individual counts. It is concerned not only with manufacturing but with any business that comes within the scope of the definition.

The Bill has not been produced in isolation; it has been prepared in concert with trade organizations in this State that run the full spectrum of manufacturing, retailing and even rural industry. The broad concepts that it includes have their support. In the wholesale and retailing businesses and the service areas the last figure I saw was that there were in this country almost 200,000 businesses in the wholesale and retail field, which were employing almost 1 ·5 million people. A large proportion of those are small businesses which would come within the definition of this Bill. They are crying out for assistance.

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition also sought to convey the impression that the problems of small business are in some way confined and exclusive to this country. He suggested that the solution to the problem of small business lay in the hands of the Fraser Government in Canberra. The problems of sman business in a free enterprise system are world-wide. They are problems that are tied up with inflation, with under-capitalization, with greater sophistication of plant in the manufacturing area and with the greater need for development of expertise in the business area.

In my recent reading I came across a statement issued by the Chairman of the Select Committee of Small Business in the United States, Senator Gaylord Nelson.


Honorable members have heard of the dislike of the honorable member for Reservoir of the multinationals. Members of the Opposition try to sell us the idea that the United States is the home of big business, til:at .it r~lies 0:r:t big business, that It IS bIg busIness. However, United States Senator Gaylord Nelson says that America's small business community is in deep trouble. It is so burdened with an accumulation of problems that the health and vigour of the entire United States economy is in danger. He goes on to say that-

The implications are considerable because small business is the bedrock of the United States economy. Of America's 13'3 mi1li~n enterprises only about 3 per cent are bIg business.

The other 12'9 million enterprises make up the small business community, which furnishes 52 per cent of all private employment.

This is after twelve month~' inquiry by a United States Senate Select Committee.

I invite members of the Opposition to compare those figures with those for Australia. They will find a comparable situation. In the United States, small business provides 43 per cent of output, again compar-

. able with Australia's 42 per cent, and one-third of the nation's gross national production. The situation in the United States is close to that of this country.

If one examines the recommenda-tions of that Select Committee, from which came the small business administration in the United Stateswhich is not dissimilar to what I visualize the future of the Victorian corporation will be-one finds comments that one can imagine refer directly to the situation in Australia

: today. I refer to comments such as-The business tax system blatantly discrim-

: inates against small business and contributes to its increasing financial weakness.

The situation of Australian proprietary companies is similar to that in the United States. Discriminatory

taxation has persisted for too long. The United States senator further stated-

Many of the largest corporations pay only about 25 per cent of their income in Federal taxes because of special treatment that has accumulated over the years. In contrast, numerous smaBer firms do pay at the full 48 per cent rate.

When one analyses our tax structures, one finds that this is comparable to what is occurring in this country. Senator Nelson goes on to say-

Thus a small firm attempting to accumulate capital to grow may be paying at twice the rate of a giant competitor.

As I pointed out earlier, only 3 per cent of the enterprises in the United States are big business.

Another point brought out is that small business is being inundated by a blizzard of paperwork. Does -anyone suggest that this is not a comparable situation worthy of consideration here? Year by year there is an increase in the work load of business in general, but a work load that is less able to be carried by small business in the development of legislation, the regulations that flow from it and the general needs of Government.

Another quotation which will appeal to our friends in the National Party is that-

The family farmer is in serious trouble. More than one-third of all United States farms went out of business in the last fifteen years.

I emphasize that in almost every instance a farm is in fact a small business.

In Wisconsin-" America's dairy-land "the number of dairy herds has decreased from 132,000 in 1951 to about 53,000 today.

How true this rings of our situation at the moment. He also states that regula tions are continually growing and sap the time, funds, and productive energies of small companies. Again, that is comparable with our situation. The report continues-

During the tight money peak some interest rates for smaller borrowers reached as high as 18 per cent.


That is again a trend of the past three years in this country when, despite assurances from the Whitlam Government that it was a lowinterest party, interest rates soared.

Bankruptcies in the United States in the fiscal year ended 30th June, 1975, jumped by 45 per cent. This was almost exclusively in the small business area, a trend unhappily being followed in this country.

Apparently, members of the Opposition would like legislation to spell out in precise detail what can be done in this area, but this Bill does not do that. They would not understand the implications from a businessman's point of view.

The calibre and the experience of the members of the Small Business Development Corporation is a critical aspect of the future of this legislation.

Mr. WHITING: Who will they be?

Mr. REESE: I can assure the honorable member that they will be worthy of their responsibility. The corporation will set up an agency for a number of specific functions that are spelt out in the Bill. I hope that the corporation will avail itself of expert help, expert recommendations, and expect considerations in various fields of precise problems to the business community. I hope a committee will be established to give advice to the agency and to the corporation of what can be done in the area of finance. In the area of management assistance I should like to see a similar back-up provided by the decision of this corporation. In the area of education a similar setup is essential.

Another area is that of research, which can cover a wide spectrum. Often one of the bug-bears of a small business is to know just where to turn to obtain advice in a particular field. The business has been commenced by the enthusiasm and the initiative of a few individuals, or possibly one individual who has an expertise in a particular area. He

also has a challenging and timeconsuming responsibility. How often does he feel the need for somewhere to turn for advice in a particular area? I hope that behind the corporation and the agency will be a committee that can give guidance in this area. These are all things that can come from the Small Business Development Corporation.

Members of the Opposition in their usual destructive style-I really appreciate the contribution of the honorable member for Ascot Vale-have asked what one would do, or how one could handle this, that or some other minor matter, but they did not discuss the over-all problem. I give the Deputy Leader of the Opposition credit that he did comment on the problem of finance availability and the need of it by small businesses. Possibly the greatest problem today-it is a direct result of the inflation that was turned loose in the past two or three years in this country-is lack of capital.

There is the problem of cash flow, the problem of knowing just how to sell $10,000 worth of stock and replace it with $12,000 worth and keeping the operation going. I do not believe it is the function of this Government to bail small business out of its trouble. The small business operator, entrepreneur or proprietor would not wish it so. There is an area in which equity is not available to firms and to businesses where there is a legitimate need and a legitimate possibility of that business surviving, being viable. maintaining its place in the economy, maintaining its ability to employ the work force, and above all maintaining diversity of products and diversity of experiment that comes from a multiplicity of businesses within a particular industry. This Bill spells out the ability of the Government to guarantee private business in a situation such as that. It gives the ability to the corporation to make recommendations to the Treasury, and for the Treasury in turn to guarantee potential lenders to small business.


That is not anything which is unique. It is happening today in small business administration in the United States of America where last year 28,000 loans were negotiated for business. Almost 80 per cent of the loans were granted by bankers and finance institutions to small business on the basis of guarantee by the Government. The sum of $1·3 billion was applied in that way out of a total availability of $1·6 billion. I feel there is ample precedent for these guarantees by the Government as the appropriate way of handling this problem. By way of illustration, I point out that the needs of small business around the world and the place they have in the economies of various countries are being recognized. In formulating this measure there has been reference to what has been done in a number of countries.

A considerable amount of work in this field is being done in Japan, West Germany and a number of European countries, as well as in the United States of America and now in Victoria. I am happy to see us breaking ground in this area. It establishes a framework on which to operate. Of course, the easiest thing in the world, as the honorable member for Ascot Vale has learnt over a long period of years, is to be a critic.

This Bill sets a pattern. It will enable a wide variety of initiatives to be taken by the corporation, and by the agency that will be created under it. I hope the Bill has the complete and utter support of business in this country. If Opposition members are in any way genuine in the suggestion that they represent the workers of this country, they will support the Bill and wish it well. After all, small business of this country, in the manufacturing section alone, is employing well over 90 per cent of the employees for whom Opposition members profess to be concerned. In that area there are 93 per cent of employees in factories that come within the definition of this Bill.

Session 1976.-27

I wish this measure well. Time will no doubt require more clothing to be put on the bones of the hand, but the framework is here. It is an excellent framework.

In the Committee stage I shall draw attention to the reporting that the corporation is required to do under clause 18 of the Bill. The clause refers to an annual report and balance-sheet being furnished to the Minister. It then specifies that the annual report shall be laid before this Parliament. However, for members of Parliament to be properly informed, the balance-sheets of the corporation, as well as a report of the successes it achieves in the small business area, should also be available for examination.

Mr. B. J. EV ANS (Gippsland East) : Honorable members who think this Bill will be a panacea for all the ills besetting small businesses will be sadly disappointed. It is well known that this Government has earned a reputation over the years, whenever a problem confronts it, for setting up some new authority, corporation or body of some description, to sort out the problem instead of meeting the situation face to face and making a decision in its own way. On many occasions, appropriate action by the Government would have solved the problem much more quickly and effectively. Many honorable members who have only recently been elected to this House have not had the background of experience to know the reasons for some of the Government's failures in the past. The Teacher Housing Authority, which was set up a couple of years ago to solve a problem, became a complete shemozzle simply because the Government did not face the reality of the problem that confronted it, and could not do anything.

The Government is in danger of trying to defend this Bill in the basis that it will be earth-shattering and will provide the answer to the problems in the small business area. As my colleague from Gippsland South said,

782 Small Business Development [ ASSEMBLY.] Corporation Bill.

this is purely a tentative step-a small step into the field-which is very much like putting one's toe in water to test the temperature. I am afraid that when that test is made the Government might find the temperature is hotter than it expected.

A couple of Government members, including the honorable member for Box Hill, whom I compliment on his speech, referred to the fact that this was broad legislation. I agree with the honorable member as the Bill is all breadth and no depth.

The Government has within its power the ability to take various steps to help small industry. Recently, by way of a question, I drew the Premier's attention to the plight of a small business in my area in relation to pay-roll tax rebates. The business is losing $3,500 a year in the value of pay-roll tax rebates because it must borrow the money in the first place to pay the pay-roll tax, and it gets it all back at the end of the financial year. The Government has the power to do something about this. Why should it mess around with this wasteful system? The Premier indicated that he had in mind that the Commonwealth Government would recognize pay-roll tax as a direct concession and would not tax the companies. However, the Premier has not been able to make that stick with the Commonwealth Government and, in the meantime, small businesses must continue to operate under a wasteful and frustrating system of having to pay pay-roll tax and having it refunded after twelve months.

I remind honorable members also of the notorious episode of workers compensation. I will not go into that in detail because every honorable member is well aware of the effect that has had on business. It is one of the most devastating blows small businesses suffered in recent years. In the sawmilling industry, which is so widespread in my electorate, this aspect had a damaging effect. In many sawmills and small businesses

Mr. B. J. EVan8.

it meant a reduction in the work force because the business could not continue to pay the number of people it had employed and could not cover its workers compensation obligations.

In the fields of third-party insurance and motor car registration, increased charges have been imposed by the Government. If we go right through the gambit of Government charges, the Government increased charges right across the board twelve months ago by 25 per cent, irrespective of whether it was justified. That is another impost which is having a serious effect on small business.

I am sorry that the Minister of Transport is not here at the moment because I should like to know what he intends to do to protect a small grocery business in Orbost which is faced with the fact that a chain competitor can deliver groceries by road through Albury to Orbost at $10 a tonne less than the local grocer can get them by rail. Of course, he must get his goods by rail. If the Government has an interest in small business, it should sort that problem out.

Mr. HOLDING: The Government would send him to a seminar so that he would know how to go broke.

Mr. B. J. EV ANS: That may happen. The sum total of what the new body will do will be to set up seminars of various kinds, but the proprietors of small businesses will be far too busy in keeping their businesses afloat to attend them.

I do not want to delay the passage of the Bill but I am curious about the qualifications of the members of the corporation. In the past, when legislation has been passed to set up new corporations, boards, authorities, councils, or whatever it may be, honorable members have been confronted with a list of qualifications or limitations on the appropriate people to be appointed. However, no indication has been given of what experience is expected of the personnel who will make up this corporation. Will they be small businessmen who have been successful and have


become big businessmen? Will they be small businessmen who have gone broke, have not been able to succeed themselves and will tell others where they went wrong? Or will they be public servants who have not had any experience? I am curious to know who will be the clairvoyant or the oracle who will advise the people engaged in such a wide range of interests in small business. Surely the range of interest in the type of small businesses that have to be considered is almost as broad as this great broad country of ours. The problems which confront many of them are common ones. In many respects they differ in accordance with the different lines of business that are being pursued.

I am curious to know from where the Government hopes to obtain the sort of people who have such a great range of knowledge that they will be able to tell small businessmen how to avoid going broke. That is not a question which anyone could answer in relation to the administration of one level of government.

What is perhaps even more important is the impact of the Commonwealth laws, particularly the taxation laws. The effects of these laws are among the most devastating on small businesses. Most honorable members would be able to make a few suggestions of the type I have made which, if implemented by the Government, would go a long way towards resolving the problems of small businesses. The question is whether the Government has the will to do something to help these businesses and whether it has the money.

On the motion of Mr. BIRRELL (Geelong West), the debate was adjourned.

It was ordered that the debate be adjourned until next day.

SECOND-HAND DEALERS (CHARITY COLLECTORS) BILL. This Bill was received from the

Council and, on the motion of Mr. SCANLAN (Minister of Special Education), was read a first time.

DANDENONG VALLEY AUTHORITY (AMENDMENT) BILL.

This Bill was received from the Council and, on the motion of Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister for Conservation) , was read a first time.

ADJOURNMENT.

REPORT ON EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT-TRANSPORT FOR MAcLEOD TECHNICAL SCHOOL STUDENTS -SALE OF PARTIALLY COMPLETED HOUSING COMMISSION HOUSESFIRE AT ST. PETER'S PRIMARY SCHOOL, CLAYTON - EASTERN END OF COLLINS STREET - CHILD CARE PROJECTS - HOUSING COMMISSION RENT COLLECTION-KINDERGARTEN SUBSIDIES - SIR COLIN MACKENZIE SANCTUARY - EXTERNAL STUDIES ALLOWANCE - MELBOURNE UNDERGROUND RAIL Loop - SPRINGVALE INTERSECTION.

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education) : I move--

That the House do now adjourn.

Mr. ROPER (Brunswick): I direct a matter to the attention of the Assistant Minister of Health. At a meeting of the Knox Early Childhood Development Complex Committee early in March, a report, prepared by a research sociologist employed for the purpose, was presented. It contained an over-all evaluation of the general work of the complex. I understand that the report was favourably disposed towards the complex and stated that it had achieved a number of improvements in the area. But apparently it was more uncharitable about other services in the area.

The report referred to the poor public transport system and the strain that the lack of transport placed on the development of such services. It pointed to difficulties which resulted from substantial screening facilities in the psychiatric and medical fields allied to the lack of treatment facilities in the area, the nearest being at Dandenong and in the city. Problems were uncovered in the

784 Adjournment. [ASSEMBL Y.] Adjournment.

screening process but for some families it was difficult to arrange for treatment.

They are reasonable remarks, but for some reason senior officers of the department decided that they were a criticism of the Government and they felt that the report should not be produced in that form.

Mr. BILLING: Did they tell you that?

Mr. ROPER: Apparently that was the impression they gave the meeting. To some extent it is justified by the fact that the Minister seemed unaware of the report at question time this morning.

Mr. SCANLAN: The Minister has had many reports.

Mr. ROPER: I am sure of that, but this is an important research evaluation. It is particularly important because of the Government's plans to start new complexes-soon, one hopes.

Mr. MACLELLAN: Which report was it?

Mr. ROPER: This is a report by a sociologist produced at the March meeting of the committee in Knox. The honorable member for Broadmeadows and other honorable members are concerned with similar developments in the areas they represent. I ask the Minister to have the report made available so that those members can read it in full rather than have to make do with some laundered version of it.

Mr. CAIN (Bundoora): I ask the Minister of Education to take steps t'O provide transport f'Or some children attending the Macleod Technical School. There is no technical school in the area for children living in Bundoora and North Watsonia who want a technical education. Their choice is between the Kingsbury Technical School, which is a boys' school some distance to the south, and the Macleod Technical School, which is to the south-east and which

is a co-educational school. Most choose to attend the Macleod Technical School.

Although it may appear from a map that that school is in reasonable proximity to where these children live, it is separated from the area by the large Mental Health Authority and Latrobe University complex.

These children have no readily accessible public transport. They must travel on a bus along 3rimshaw Street and then take a train to the Macleod station. The trip takes 55 minutes in the morning and the return trip takes 1 hour and 20 minutes in the afternoon. This is a cause of great concern to 23 or 24 parents who prefer to arrange motor car transport on a roster system. This imposes some degree of hardship on those parents who feel that some assistance could well be provided by the department to enable them to get these children to and from the school in a more reasonable way than they can at present. I ask the Minister to consider whether some assist'ance can be provided for these children.

Mr. WILTON (Broadmeadows): I direct a matter to the attention of the Minister of Housing and Minister for Planning. Early in April I wrote to the honorable gentleman seeking information about the sale of Housing Commission blocks with partially constructed homes 'On them. As yet, I have not received a reply. Some purchasers of these blocks. are now offering them for resale. SIgns have already appeared on one blo~k indicating that an auction sale WIll take place on 5th June.

I have been informed that the commission sold these blocks with partly constructed homes for about $5,000 each and that one person who purchased some of the bloc~s is offering them for resale and IS prepared to negotiate priv'ate sales at between $14,000 and $15,000. Even the Minister will agree that that is 'a fair sort of rip-off in a period of some two months.

Adjournment. [11 MAY, 1976.] Adjournment. 785

I ask the honorable gentleman to inquire whether my letter has reached his office. I also ask him to carry out an urgent investigation into why the commission sold these blocks under such circumstances when they can be offered for resale at an enormous profit in such a short space of time.

Mr. REESE (Heatherton): I direct the attention of the Minister of Education to the serious fire which occurred on the night of Monday, 3rd May at St. Peters Primary School, Mary Street, Clayton. Three timber class-rooms and most of a brick assembly and recreation hall were destroyed. Because of the loss of these three class-rooms and their contents it was not possible to conduct classes for the pupils formerly accommodated in them in the last week of the first term.

I ask the Minister whether he has been requested to assist in obtaining three portable class-rooms urgently so that the classes may resume for these pupils when the second term of this year commences. If so, what action is proposed? If not, I now request that the honorable gentleman give urgent attention to this problem.

Mr. JONES (Melbourne) : At question time today I raised a matter on the future of the eastern end of CoBins Street. In the absence of the Minister for Planning the Deputy Premier did his valiant best to answer my question and indicated general support for its preservation. I now raise with the Minister for Planning the general question of the request by the National Trust of Victoria that an interim development order be placed on the eastern end of Collins Street to preserve something of its architectural distinction and historical character-at least so much of it as remains. The area has been deteriorating, probably since 1956, when the first glass-house was erected at 100 Collins Street, and a number of distinguished architectural features have been removed.

Mr. EDMUNDS: The Melbourne Club will be preserv,ed.

Mr. JONES: Fortunately, the Melbourne Club building remains and it will remain S'O long as the Protestant establishment exists in this State.

The Melbourne City Council has power to impose an interim development order, but it seems reluctant to do so. The National Trust has accused the Melbourne City Council and the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works of "dithering". I hope that is a word which can never be applied to the State Government. If the Melbourne City Council is not prepared to impose an interim development order under the powers conferred on it by the Town and Country Planning Act, will the Minister be prepared to exercise his own powers to make sure that the historic character of the eastern end of CoIlins Street is preserved? The Act gives power to preserve what are described as buildings, in declared areas, of architectural, historical or scientific interest. When the Historic Buildings Act was enacted, strong pleas were made that areas should be declared. I hope the Minister will act.

Mr. COLLINS (Noble Park): I direct to the attention of the Assistant Minister of Health, as the Minister responsible for child development, a matter of considerable urgency not only to the area I represent but to many others as well. It relates to 60 child-care projects which received the approval of the Childrens Commission and State Consultative Committees in 1975 and, in the case ofmv 'Own electorate, approval for the Keysborough Freedom Club Co-operative Ltd. was received on 17th December, 1975. These projects were to be funded under the children's services Budget allocation of $74 million, but early in February this year the present Federal Government cut the Budget by $9 million. Many groups were concerned that they would lose funds which they S'O desperately sought and appeared to be receiving.

786 Adjournment. [ASSEMBLY.] Adjournment.

These people had a conference with the Federal Minister f'Or S'Ocial Welfare and the previous Victorian Minister of Health. where they put forward their priority estimates. The two ,Ministers reached an agreement. I understand. on the 3rd or 4th March this year. which they announced in various press statements. In a news release, the Victorian Minister stated-

Alan Scanlan, M.P., Minister of Health, stated today that he had reached agreement with Senator Margaret Guilfoyle, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister in child care matters, to use $2·26 million not spent this financial year, for major childhood services throughout the State on the recommendation of the State Advisory Committee on Preschool and Childhood Services.

The committee had recommended that $974,000 of the unexpended moneys be used for a wide range of childhood services throughout the State.

The decision made will enable work to proceed on a number of urgent projects which were in doubt because of uncertainty about funding. This will enable the Victorian programme to continue without any cuts or reductions for this financial year.

Als'O attached to the press release was a list of the new initiatives approved, which included 59 projects and which ultimately became 60 because one item was split into two.

Subsequently, on 9th March, in a news release the Federal Minister stated. inter alia-

Senator the Honorable Margaret Guilfoyle today announced that the Commonwealth Government will fund 144 new children'S service projects in Australia this financial year.

The new projects, all for services in areas of high need, have been given approval on the basis of recommendations from State Consultative Committees in each State.

The new projects, which would assist more than 5,000 children, range from family day care programmes and full-day care services to outside school hours activities, and assistance to help existing pre-schools expand their activities to provide other services. Emphasis is given to projects which provide multi-purpose activities, and projects catering for out of school hours care for latchkey children are also highlighted.

I understand that the funds are somewhere between Canberra and the Victorian Department of Health. Many of these projects are in danger

of folding, and without funds they will fold. I request the Minister to investigate this matter urgently so that these projects may continue.

Mr. CATHIE (Carrum): I raise with the Minister of Housing a matter concerning the collection of rents for pensioners' 2-story flats in Valetta Street, Carrum. Apparently, the rent collector moves around in a mobile van, parks it in the street 'Outside the flats and waits for the pensioners to come to the van to pay their rent. With the onset of winter, and the inclement and sometimes wet and miserable weather, it is inconvenient for these elderly people who are often physically handicapped to have to move outside and perhaps wait to pay their rent. I believe no great inconvenience would be caused to the commission or to the rent collector concerned if he visited each flat to collect the rent as would occur with a private landlord.

Mr. EDMUNDS (Ascot Vale): I raise a rnatter with the Assistant ,Minister of Health on behalf of the Minister of Health concerning the payment of a subsidy cheque to the Clifford Kindergarten in Buckley Street, Essend'On, to meet the salaries of the teacher and her assistant. The cheque was due early in April and the kindergarten has now exhausted its funds. Therefore, it is faced with the serious position of perhaps closing down which would adversely ·affect many constituents in the area that I represent. The kindergarten is reluctant to close down the services which it has provided for children in the Essendon district since 1943.

I ask the Minister, first thing tomorrow morning, to call for the file concerning payment of the cheque because the action required is merely administrative. The Minister needs pnly to sign a cheque and the kindergarten can keep going. I note that the Minister is grinning like a fish at the moment but I ask the Minister to do what I have asked first thing tom'Orrow morning.


The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): I think the kindergarten is actually situated in the electorate of the honorable member for Essendon.

Mr. EDMUNDS: That could well be so and if he were able to, I am sure that the honorable member for Essendon would support me and raise this matter on the motion for the adjournment of the sitting, because the continuation of the kindergarten is vital to those parents who live within the general area encompassed by the electorates of Essendon, Niddrie and Ascot Vale. All the Minister needs to do is to sign a cheque if the funds are available, fill in the amount and then cross it " not negotiable".

The SPEAKER: I am sure that the Minister understands.

Mr. EDMUNDS: I am not so sure because the honorable gentleman was laughing inanely. If the Minister will do that tomorrow morning, the problems facing the kindergarten will be solved. On behalf of the honorable members for Essendon, Niddrie and Ascot Vale, I urge the Minister to take this action tomorrow morning.

Mr. LIND (Dandenong): I raise a matter concerning charges at the Sir Colin MacKenzie Sanctuary. Recently a constituent of mine visited the sanctuary and was told that the admission charge was $1.20 for adults and 30 cents for children. As he had a family with him, he thought the charge was too great and spoke to the woman at the turnstiles who referred him to the park ranger. The park ranger told him that it was just too bad if he did not have the money. I ask the Minister concerned for his views on the action of the park ranger in speaking to a wouldbe client in that way and telling him also that he thought the charges ought to be higher. I also ask the Minister whether it would be preferable to encourage our young people to see the sanctuary by lowering the charges rather than keeping them at their present level.

Mr. MelNNES {Gippsland South): I raise a matter on behalf of a Mrs. Dorothy Morris of Rumberg via

Foster concerning an application for tertiary education assistance, which admittedly is a Federal matter. Mrs. Morris is an external studies student and unless she has at least 75 per cent of the normal work load she does not become eligible for assistance under the Federal scheme. She points out in correspondence that an external studies student at the State College of Victoria, Melbourne, may take studies to the value of 18 points or 50 per cent of a full academic year and that in special circumstances, in the second, third or fourth years, the external student can go as high as 24 points, which is 66 per oent of a full academic year but that at no time is it possible to reach 75 per cent. Therefore, there is discrimination against country external part-time students which prevents them from obtaining assistance from the Federal Government under its Tertiary Education Assistance Scheme.

The lady to whom I refer is desirous of carrying on from where she left off with her teacher training. With the present economic conditions in country areas, this person would like to complete the fourth year while it is possible. She cannot take up fulltime studies and therefore she must do it by external studies.

Mr. SIMMONDS (Reservoir): I ask the Minister of Labour and Industry to give consideration to the position that has arisen following the settlement of the industrial dispute on the Melbourne underground rail loop project.

On 26th April, in the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission, in dealing with an application by Mr. Ferdinands and Mr. Stelmach for leave to intervene on behalf of Her Majesty the QU1een in right of the State of Victoria, Mr. Commissioner Brown said that on a previous occasion when the matter was before the commission, which was 22nd April, the capacity of the commission to handle the matter was challenged by the Melbourne Underground Rail Loop Authority and the Victorian Government for lack of existence of


an industrial dispute within the meaning of the Act. The Commissioner also said that consequently he met the principal parties, as a result of which further information became available and that it was on that basis that the commISSIon, of its own motion, decided to call the matter on as an application to vary the award ..

This matter has been before the commission for nine weeks whereas within two days the dispute could have been settled on exactly the same terms as it was today. For the Minister's information, the terms of settlement were placed before members of the union involved this morning and endorsed by those members following a report by the organizer. On Friday 7th May, the parties were again called before the commission when Commissioner Brown, on his own motion varied the old metal trades award with these improvements-

Ten days' sick leave a year, which represented an increase of five days.

Double time for .overtime after the first two hours of time and one-halfit was previously double time after three hours.

Annual leave loading of 17·5 per cent to be paid pro rata on termination.

The underground allowance to be increased from 26 cents an hour to 33 cents an hour and a $3.30 a week additional payment.

Meal allowance and leading hand allowance to be increased in line with the national building trades and construction award on 26th May, 1976.

The severance payment to be reviewed in the light of the full bench decision expected shortly.

The companies agreed to supply three pairs of overalls and one pair of safety boots per year.

Retrospectivity back to 1st January, 1976.

All 'Other payments were rejected. Mr. Simmonds.

The parties involved in the dispute were able to confer on the 16 points and basically the arbitrated decision was finally put to the membership. One factor which arose concerned an attempt by the employers to absorb the existing $2.40 a week construction tradesman's allowance into the new $3.30 underground alowance, but this matter was resolved. It was agreed by the employers and the employees that, following the decisi'On, work will resume on the Parliament House underground station this evening.

I suggest that the dispute, which has extended for nine weeks, could have been settled within two days if the same procedures had been carried out in the first week. An arbitrated decision on Friday has enabled resumption of work to take place on Tuesday. If the Government seeks t'O impose its economic policies in the industrial relations sphere in the same way in future, similar incidents will occur. I ask the Minister of Labour and Industry to consider the matter so that in future there will not be a repetition of such action.

Mr. BILUNG (Springvale): I refer to the intersection of Springvale R'Oad, Centre Road, Police Road and the Princes Highway which without doubt is one of the busiest and m'Ost signalized intersections in Victoria. Forty-two traffic signals control this intersection and at increasing intervals this area becomes the subject of the malfunction of the switching gear which, in the opinion of the local city engineer, is obsolete. Further, at this intersection from time to time one may witness, particularly when the Sandown races or the Victorian Football League football matches are being held, up to fifteen policemen being allocated to control an intersection which has been considered to be adequately controlled by 42 signals.

One concedes that the ultimate solution to the problem is some sort of clover leaf or overpass system at considerable expense. One thinks that the immediate remedy may be urgent action by the Road Safety and Traffic Authority, but in reply to


inquIrIes the authority has said that it does not have the money to carry out this work although the amount of money is apparently fairly small in relation to the value which society places on human life. I ask the Chief Secretary through the Minister representing him in this House to treat this matter urgently to avoid a repetition of the shemozzle that occurs at this intersection when the mechanisms do not function.

It is also suspected that somebody has a key or access to the con trolling area and perhaps deliberately switches off the mechanism. If this is the case surely the Road Safety and Traffic Authority engineers can make an urgent examination of the area~ If this mechanism is so easily tampered with it should be replaced immediately.

Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health): The honorable member for Brunswick referred to a report from a sociologist relating to the Knox Early Childhood Development Complex. I regret that the honorable member does not recall the name of the sociologist who made this report and I should be glad if he would give it to me so that I may identify the report to which he refers.

I refer to what I regard as an unwarranted attack on the departmental officers in assuming their reaction to this report. The honorable member gave no confirmation of the reaction of departmental officers but by implication he indicated that the reaction was that they were not proposing to release the report. Certainly this matter has not been referred to me. No decision has been made not to release the report, and when the honorable member identifies the reports to me I shall look into the matter at the earliest opportunity.

The honorable member for Ascot Vale raised the matter of the CHfford pre-school kindergarten. This is one of the applications for subsidies which have been received from

1,000 kindergartens in Victoria. I am sorry that when he received the letter this morning the honorable member did not let me know the name of the kindergarten; he may well have had the cheque by this afternoon. I will look into the matter.

The honorable member for Noble Park referred specifically to the problem which affected a child care centre in his electorate. I assume he was referring to the Keysborough Freedom Club Co-operative, which is located in his district. He referred to the specific delay in the payment for that project. This project has a number of unusual complications asassociated with it. The Keysborough Parish Centre agreed to make a site available to the Keysborough Freedom Club Co-operative for the purpose of conducting a child care centre. The co-operative had applied for $35,000 of Commonwealth funds to purchase and alter a house and remove it to the church site. However the church made it clear to the Department of Health that it did not want to be responsible for handling any grants that had been paid to the co-operative. The co-operative does not have a title to the land in question and consequently no grant can be paid by the Department of Health. The Department of Health would prefer to pay the money to the church. and as soon as the church and the co-operative can reach agreement to enable the money to be paid by the department- -

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): Order! I remind the honorable member for Brunswick that he may not make reflections to people in the gallery. It appeared to me, and I may be mistaken, that he was doing that.

Mr. ROPER (Brunswick): On a point of personal explanation, Mr. Speaker, in fact I was observing the honorable member for Noble Park, who seemed to be somewhat concerned. He happens to be in the


direction of the gallery. There is nobody in the gallery who is an acquaintance of mine.

Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health) : As soon as the church and the co-operative agree on the responsibility for accepting the funds, the Department of Health will make the subsidy available.

The honorable member then referred to the press statement made by the then Minister of Health earlier in March about 59 approved child care projects in Victoria. I make it clear that in not one of these projects is the payment of maintenance being held up where the application of a capital subsidy has been made under a Commonwealth scheme or under the State scheme. Concerning the other child care projects, I point out that the scheme is dependent upon an agreement being reached between the Commonwealth and the States on a number of--

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): Order! I know the Minister is trying to answer in detail, but the honorable member raised a specific matter with respect to Noble Park. That should be the substance of the reply.

Mr. JONA: I understood clearly that the honorable member quoted at length from a press statement issued by the then Minister of Health dealing with an agreement that had been reached by Senator Guilfoyle regarding 59 projects and I was endeavouring to explain the position to the House. The payments of these subsidies will be dependent on an agreement being reached between the Commonwealth and States on a number of matters, such as staff scheduling. The work which has been done in Victoria on this and the discussions which have taken place at departmental officer level are well advanced, as are those which have taken place between the Commonwealth and the other States, and it is hoped agreement will be reached in the near future.

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education) : The honorable member for Bundoora referred to the difficulty in obtaining transport for students living in the general Macleod area and wishing to travel to Kingsbury Technical School. I shall be pleased to investigate that matter.

The honorable member for Gippsland South suggested that the Commonwealth Department of Education is making a distinction between students who are doing external studies at the Gippsland institute and those at the State College of Victoria at Melbourne. I shall make inquiries about that. I am not aware that the Commonwealth makes any such distinction but if it is making the type of distinction outlined by the honorable member I shall endeavour to have it rectified.

The other matter directed to my attention was raised by the honorable member for Heatherton. In recent years the Government has been endeavouring to develop a much closer relationship with independent schools, including schools within the Catholic system. During the past seven or eight years schools within the State and Catholic systems have had considerable difficulties with fire. The Catholic system has been very ready to help the Government in a number of emergency cases and, similarly, the Government has been ready to assist the Catholic schools. The fire mentioned by the honorable member for Heatherton was at St. Peters at Clayton. There is an urgent need for the provision of three classrooms and I believe it will be possible to provide three portables on site at St. Peters, Clayton, this week.

Mr. HA YES (Minister of Housing): Three matters were addressed to me. The honorable member for Carrum referred to pensioner rent collection and suggested that perhaps the Housing Commission's officer, at no great inconvenience, could call upon the various individual residents rather than collect in bulk. I should


have thought that had the honorable member been to the settlement of which he spoke, it could be arranged that various residents there collect on behalf of their neighbours. The same has been done at Boronia and it seems to be an acceptable arrangement; it works for the convenience of the people. The winter is not yet upon us and I would have thought this matter could have been covered by a letter.

The honorable member for Broadmeadows mentioned an unanswered letter, and I should like to think that he referred to it as an exceptional situation. I will investigate the missing answer and apologize if that be necessary.

In relation to the Broadmeadows estate, the Housing Commission in recent years had some trouble getting builders, and the unions involved to build houses for the commission. As a result of the stalemate the Housing Commission liquidated those half-finished or part-finished blocks, some with frames at about $5,000 to $6,000 a lot. If the building unions which black-listed Housing Commission buildings on that estate take the same attitude with the private people who buy these lots, the people have been sold a pup.

Mr. WIL TON: What steps have you taken to ensure the public is aware of the situation?

Mr. HA YES: I have just said that if the unions take the same attitude with private people who buy those lots, as they did with the commission, the people are being sold a pup because they have no hope of houses ever being built.

The honorable member for Melbourne spoke of the eastern end of Coli ins Street. I missed his question this afternoon. Certainly at the Ministry of Housing and the Ministry for Planning, there has been no proposal from the National Trust. I cannot speak for the Premier. In the press

the National Trust has suggested certain courses of action, but nothing had come across my table as at 4 p.m. today. Earlier this week Mr. Clerehan, as quoted in the Herald, suggested that the National Trust might have left its run a little late-twenty years late! Lots of spring-heeled Charlies have come along lately and I have called for reports on the situation. Lately there seems to be a bent for rushing around and putting seals for posterity on buildings, with some enthusiasm for history, but little acceptance as to the question of equity. I hope this zeal will slow down.

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister for Conservation): The honorable member for Dandenong raised the matter of the Healesville wildlife sanctuary, and the attitudes of an employee of that body. I do not know where one could get better value for one's self and one's child than at Healesville wildlife sanctuary if in fact the entrance fees are as stated by the honorable member for Dandenong. The honorable member said that the charges were $1.20 for adults and 30 cents for children. In view of the level of wages in the community today, that is a fair charge, and certainly minute in comparison with the price of taking children to the pictures in the city. The Healesville wildlife sanctuary gives a good educational service to children, and teachers are employed there. I remind the honor-able member, who referred to the attitude of a staff member of the sanctuary, that the staff are not public servants or Government employees. If the honorable member wishes to lodge a complaint on behalf of his constituents about the attitude of any member of the sanctuary's staff, he m'ay contact the secretary or president of the committee of management. If he does not wish to do that, he may lodge a complaint with me and I will ensure that the sanctuary receives it.

792 Adjournment. [ASSEMBLY.] Questions on Notice.

Mr. MACLELLAN (Minister of Labour and Industry): I note with great pleasure the attitude of the honorable member for Reservoir 'and his enthusiasm for the industrial settlement of the underground rail loop dispute. I am sure that, with the Minister of Transport and myself, the honorable member is pleased that this nine-week dispute has been settled. The honorable member implied that the State of Victoria should not make representations in any hearing of this matter. I do not think that suggestion can be accepted. It is clear that there was an opportunity to settle the dispute by a return to work for the whole nine weeks, and that the settlement could still have been arbitrated while the men were at work rather than by their losing pay, which cost the Melbourne Underground Rail Loop Authority 'a loss and the people of Victoria the frustration of knowing that this great public work was no longer proceeding.

Mr. SCANLAN (Minister of Special Education) : The honorable member for Springvale raised a matter which I know is close to his heart and which he has previously raised with the Chief Secretary and the Minister of Transport. The honorable member referred particularly to the intersection of Springvale Road and Princes Highway, which is one of the most complex intersections in the metropolitan area. The complicated traffic signals have malfunctioned from time to time and have necessitated supervision to ensure adequate traffic control.

I will certainly direct to the Chief Secretary the representations made by the honorable member both on his own behalf and on behalf of the people of Springvale. I shall ask the Chief Secretary to consider providing grade separation at the intersection.




The following answers to questions On notice were circulated-

CORIO TROTTING-GREYHOUND TRACK.

(Question No. 3)

Mr. TREZISE (Geelong North) asked the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation-

1. Whether he has conferred with the Minister of Water Supply on the provision of adequate water and sewerage facilities to allow the proposed Corio trotting-greyhound track to proceed as early as possible; if so, with what result?

2. When it is expected that racing will commence at the new track?

Mr. DIXON (Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation): The answer is-

1. I have personally corresponded with the Minister of Water Supply, the Honorable F. J. Granter, on the provision of adequate water and sewerage facilities to the proposed Corio trotting-greyhound track. Mr. Granter has advised that he will discuss this matter with the Water Commission.

2. At this stage development has commenced on the site, but only to the extent of preliminary drainage works. It is not possible to indicate a commencement date for racing.

OFFICIAL VISITORS TO MENTAL HEALTH INSTITUTIONS.

(Question No. 11)

Mr. ROPER (Brunswick) asked the Assistant Minister of Health, for the Minister of Health-

In respect of official visitors appointed pu,rsuant to section 66 of the Mental Health Act 1959-

1. Who 'are the visitors for each institution? 2. What was the date of original appoint

ment, present appointment and termination of appointment respectively, of each visitor?

3. What are the relevant qualifications of each visitor?

Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health) : The answer supplied by the Minister of Health is-

Questions (11 MAY, 1976.] on Notice.

1 and 2.

Official visitor Date of original Date of present Date of termination of appointment appointment present appointment

Ararat-Mrs. B. M. DeClercq 13th December, 1966 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mrs. L. Blizzard .. 14th December, 1971 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mr. O. E. Marx .. 17th October, 1967 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Dr. P. R. Padmanabhan 27th February, 1973 27th February, 1975 31st October, 1977 Mr. W. C. Henning 4th December, 1973 4th December, 1973 31st October, 1977 Cr. A. Pope 1st October, 1974 1st October, 1974 31st October, 1977

Ballarat-Mr. R. Hobson 28th April, 1964 24th August, 1971 13th August, 1976 Mr. R. C. Dobso~' 27th May, 1952 24th August, 1971 13th August, 1976 Mrs. M. Bowles .. 16th August, 1966 24th August, 1971 13th August, 1976 Dr. W. Jenkins 16th August, 1966 24th August, 1971 13th August, 1976 Mr. M. Cain in, J.P. 16th August, 1966 24th August, 1971 13th August, 1976 Mrs. E. K. Eddy .. 24th August, 1971 24th August, 1971 13th August, 1976

Beechworth-Mrs. I. W. Thornley .. 20th May, 1952 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mr. A. P. McKenzie-McHarg 25th February. 1969 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mr. J, A. B. Churchill 29th March, 1960 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Cr. J. J. Macaulay 21st October, 1969 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mr. W. B. Frankling 23rd March, 1976 23rd March, 1976 31st October, 1977 Cr. H. C. Lucas .. 20th June, 1972 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mrs. D. dePrada .. 23rd March, 1976 23rd March, 1976 31st October, 1977

Bendigo-Mrs. J. Tweed 27th February, 1973 27th February, 1973 26th February, 1978 Cr. T. Flood 27th February, 1973 27th February, 1973 26th February, 1978 Cr. A. Craig 27th February, 1973 27th February, 1973 26th February. 1978 Mrs. G. Brooks 27th February, 1973 27th February, 1973 26th February, 1978 Mr. T. Iser 27th February. 1973 27th February, 1973 26th February, 1978 Dr. T. Udvary 26th June, 1973 26th June, 1973 26th February, 1978

Bundoora-Dr. R. Wyatt 17th May, 1960 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mrs. E. M. Hall .. 16th October, 1956 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mr. T. B. Milburn 16th October, 1956 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mr. G. M. Leon .. 23rd November, 1971 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977

Dandenong-Mr. L. M. Keating, M.B.E. 14th March, 1973 14th March, 1973 13th March, 1978 Mr. R. D. Van Nooten 14th March, 1973 14th March, 1973 13th March, 1978 Mrs. D. E. Bailey 14th March, 1973 14th March, 1973 13th March, 1978 Mrs. I. W. Cussen 14th March, 1973 14th March, 1973 13th March, 1978 Dr. K. R. Griffiths 14th March, 1973 14th March, 1973 13th March, 1978 Rev. J. Cousins .. 14th October, 1975 14th October, 1975 13th March, 1978

Mental Hospital, Larundel, Psychiatric Hospital, Larundel Training Centre, Janefield and Kingsbury Training Centre.

Dr. G. H. Capp .. 22nd May, 1962 2nd March, 1976 31st October, 1977 Mr. A. E. Willox .. 22nd May, 1962 2nd March, 1976 31st October, 1977 Mrs. N. Cook .. 10th June, 1969 2nd March, 1976 31st October, 1977 Mrs. J. S. Park 22nd May, 1962 2nd March, 1976 31st October, 1977 Mr. F. R. Lacey :: 23rd September, 1975 2nd March, 1976 31st October, 1977 Mrs. E. W. Bingham 2nd February, 1972 2nd March, 1976 31st October, 1977

Kew and Kew Cottages-Mr. G. P. McKenzie 22nd June, 1971 ht November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mr. N. Baughan .. 4th March, 1952 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mr. 1. M. Homden 4th March, 1952 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mr. R. McN. Brazier 3rd July, 1973 .. 3rd July. 1973 ., 31st October, 1977 Mr. J. D. Ryan, J.P. 3rd February, 1976 3rd February, 1976 31st October, 1977 Mrs. J. O'Brien .. 3rd February, 1976 3rd February, 1976 31st October, 1977

Mont Park and Plenty Dr. H. Eizenberg 28th February, 1972 2nd December, 1975 31st October, 1978 Mrs. F. K. Noble 24th April, 1956 2nd December, 1975 31st October, 1978 Mrs. D. M. Deakin 11th October, 1971 2nd December, 1975 31st October, 1978 Mrs. D. E. Twist 28th November, 1961 2nd December, 1975 31st October, 1978 Mr. R. H. Rush .. 2nd December, 1975 2nd December, 1975 31st October, 1978

Royal Park-Cr. R. J. Walker .. 3rd November, 1971 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Dr. E. A. Briglia 18th October, 1966 1st November, 1972 31st October, 1977 Mrs. D. E. Twist 11th March, 1973 11th March, 1973 31st October, 1977 Cr. A. S. Richards 14th May, 1974 14th May, 1974 31st October, 1977 Dr. J. J. Griffin .. 5th September, 1974 5th September, 1974 31st October, 1977 Cr. A. J. Watson 5th September, 1974 5th September, 1974 31st October, 1977

Sunbury-Appointment of new panel of visitors now under consideration following expiry of term of previous panel.

Traralgon-Dr. C. Bridges-Webb Mr. C. Hackford .. Mrs. D. Saunders .. Mrs. J. Jacka Mrs. H. Jones

Warrnambool-

5th February, 1974 5th February, 1974 5th February, 1974 5th February, 1974 5th February, 1974



Appointment of new panel of visitors now under consideration following expiry of term of previous panel.

793

Appointment of new panel of visitors now under consideration following expiry of term of previous panel.

3. Section 66 of the Mental Health Act 1959 prescribes the conditions of appointment of official visitors. No specific qualifications are called for except that in any panel one shall be a medical practitioner, one shall be a practising barrister or solicitor, and in the case of State institutions, one shall be a woman and one shall be appointed to represent voluntary organizations working for the sick or mentally ill in the neighbourhood of the institution. The Act further provides that if it is impracticable to appoint any of the qualified persons referred to above, the Governor in Council may appoint some other person in his stead.

Defendant Offence

INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION. (Question No. 34)

Mr. CA THIE (Carrum) asked the Minister for Conservation-

1. What has been the result of the blitz on the Mordialloc creek catchment area to find the sources of heavy metal pollution, announced in the Mordialloc-Chelsea News on 17th March, 1976?

2. How many prosecutions have been launched to date in the metropolitan area by the Environment Protection Authority for industrial }X)llution, indicating-( a) how many of such prosecutions were successful; and (b) the company and the source and type of pollution in each case?

Court Date

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister for Conservation): The answer is-

1. An extensive sampling programme was commenced on 29th March, 1976, to determine the concentrations of heavy metals in the waters of the tributaries to Mordialloc Creek. The analytical results of samples were reached on 22nd April, 1976, and are the basis for a further programme which commenced on 1st May, 1976, and is expected to be completed In early June, 1976.

2. The Environment Protection Authority and its delegated agencies have launched prosecutions against 76 persons and companies. The attached table discloses the details of all prosecutions naming the defendant, the nature of the offence, the court and date, the result and the agency instigating the investigation.

Result Agency

Gardiner Smith Pty. Ltd. Water pollution G. Comclli . . . . . . .. Water pollution

Footscray Daylesford Geelong

26th June, 1973 Convicted and fined $1,000 with $100 costs E.P.A. 21st September, 1973 Convicted and fined $20 with $40 costs " E P.A.

The Phosphate Co-operative Co. of Aust. Air pollution Ltd.

A1ucast Pty. Ltd. . . . . " Unlicensed discharge of waste Mordialloc Wonnald International Chemicals Pty. Air pollution .. Northcotc

Ltd. Massey Ferguson (Aust.) Ltd. Water pollution " .. Sunshine Dorf Industries Pty. Ltd. . . Unlicensed discharge of waste Springvale Shell Refining (Aust.) Pty. Ltd. Water pollution .. .. Geelong The Rocbester Co-operativc Butter and Water pollution Rochester

Unlicensed discharge of waste (2 charges)

Canning Co. Ltd. David Hyland and Sons Pty. Ltd. Port Melbourne

SomerviIIe Hotel Pty. Ltd. . . .. Unlicensed discharge of waste Murray Goulburn Co-operative Co. Ltd. Water pollutjon . . . • V.D.O. Instruments (Aust.) Pty. Ltd. Unlicensed discharge of waste

Frankston Cohuna Heidelberg MeIton Westmelton (Vic.) Pty. Ltd. .. Breach of licence conditions two

charges Water pollution Lindemans Vincs Pty. Ltd. Mildura

1. Water pollution .. . . } 2. Unlicenseddischargeofwaste DandenonB 3. Unlicensed discharge of waste

White Crow Ltd.

Uniaate Aust. Pty. Ltd. I. Water pollution .. . . J 2. Unlicensed discharge of waste ~ Dandenong 3. Unlicensed discharge of waste J Watcr pollution SpringvaIe Motor Producers Ltd.

8th October, 1973 Convicted and fined $1,000 with $50 costs E.P.A.

14th February, 1974 Convicted and fined $100 with $100 costs E.P.A. 27th February, 1974 Convicted and fined $1,000 with $216 costs E.P.A.

5th April, 1974 14th May, 1974 29th July, 1974 7th August, 1974

Convicted and fined $500 with $50 costs E.P.A. Convicted and fined $100 with $100 costs D.V.A. Convicted and fined $500 with $150 costs E.P.A. Convicted and fined $400 with $150 costs S.R. & W.S.C.

19th September. 1974 .. Convicted and fined $100 on the first charge E.P.A. and $200 on the second with $75 costs

19th September, 1974 .. Convicted and fined $100 with $70 costs.. S.R. & W.S.C. 1st October, 1974 Convicted and tined $200 with $75 costs.. S.R. & W.S.C. 4th October, 1974 Convicted and fined $250 with 550 costs.. E.P.A. 15th October, 1974 Convicted and tined 5500 on each charge S.R. & W.S.C.

with $100 professional costs 29th October, 1974 Convicted and fined $200 with $100 costs S.R. & W.S.C. 30th October, 1974

6th November, 1974

6th November, 1974 ..

10th December, 1974 ..

Convicted and fined 5500 on each charge E.P.A. with $130 professional costs

All charges withdrawn upon conviction of E.P.A. subsidiary Co. White Crow Ltd.

Defendant company convicted and fined D.V.A. $250 with $75 professional costs

-...)

':f

~ ~ ~.

): CI.l CI.l tt1

~ ~

..:...,

§

~ .... ~.

Defendant

C. Tsimiklis

D. Tsimiklis

Raymond 10hn McCorkell

Gardinol Chemical Co. Pty. Ltd.

David Bull Laboratories Pty. Ltd.

George Weston Foods Ltd.

Hothlyn (B.G.A.) Pty. Ltd.

Offence

Unlicensed discharge of waste 2 Fitzroy charges

Unlicensed discharge of waste 2 Fitzroy charges

Court

1. Water pollution .. .. Apollo Bay (part heard) 2. Unlicensed discharge of waste Colac

Air pollution 2 charges

Water pollution

Water pollution 4 charges

Water pollution

Box Hill Kew ..

Springvale

Ringwood

Melbourne

Allied Mills Industries Pty. Ltd. Unlicensed discharge of waste Footscray McDonalds System of Aust. Pty. Ltd. Unlicensed discharge of waste Springvale ·Gippsland Amalgamated Milk Products Breach of licence conditions 3 Maffra

Ltd. charges, unlicensed discharge of waste 2 charges

Tovey Enterprizes Pty. Ltd. .. . . • Australian Paper Manufactures Limited

lan George Murr .. Wilke and Co. Ltd ... Brooke Bond Monbulk Ltd. Peerage Giftware Pty. Ltd. Mobil Oil Aust. Ltd. . . M.T. Chemicals (Aust.) Pty. Ltd. . . Co-operative Farmers and Graziers Direct

Meat Supply Ltd. Mario Giompapa .. Sebastiano Pitruzzello . . . . Murray Goulburn Co-operative Co. Ltd.

Theo George Rapsey

Robert Edward 10iner Mavron Nominees Pty. Ltd.

Telbar Pty. Ltd. .. Raymond Anthony Sailab

Unlicensed discharge of waste Breach of licence conditions 2

charges Unlicensed discharge of waste Unlicensed discharge of waste Water pollution . . . . Unlicensed discharge of waste Water pollution . . . . Unlicensed discharge of waste Water pollution

Ferntree Gully Morwell

Lang Lang Springvale Dandenong .. Ferntree Gully Footscray Springvale Ballarat

Unlicensed discharge of waste Preston Unlicensed discharge of waste Preston Water pollution Swan Hill

Water pollution Swan Hill

Water pollution . . .. Kyabram .. Breach of licence conditions J 5 Ferntree Gully

charges

Unlicensed discharge Water pollution

Springvale Preston

• Solicitors Whiting and Byme of 440 Collins Street, Melbourne acted in this matter.

Date

11th December, 1974

11th December, 1974 ..

3rd December, 1974 .. 18th December, 1974 ..

6th lune, 1974 part heard 23rd October, 1974 6th February, 1975 deci

sion 13th February, 1975

13th February, 1975

14th February, 1975

19th February, 1975 27th February, 1975 5th March, 1975

14th March, 1975 25th March, 1975

14th May, 1975 21st May, 1975 11th lune, 1975 13th June, 1975 25th June, 1975 16th luly, 1975 24th luly, 1975

6th August, 1975 6th August, 1975 .. 12th August, 1975 to 14th

August, 1975 12th August, 1975 to 14th

August, 1975 28th August, 1975 .. 12th September, 1975 ..

24th September, 1975 .. 1st October, 197.5

Result Agency

Charge in respect of 19th September, 1974 E.P.A. dismissed. Charge in respect of 26th luly 1974 : defendant convicted and fined $75 with $25 costs

Charge in respect of 19th September, 1974 E.P.A. dismissed. Charge in respect of 26th July. 1974 ; defendant convicted and fined $75 and $25 costs

Defendant convicted on both charges. On S.R. & W.S.C. charge one fined $300 with $100 profes-sional costs. On charge two fined $100

Both charges dismissed E.P.A.

Defendant company convicted and fined D.V.A. S400 with $100 costs

Defendant company pleaded guilty to one E.P .A. charge. Other three charges withdrawn. Convicted and fined $500 with $350 costs

Defendant company convicted and fined E.P.A. $500 with 5175 costs

Charge withdrawn . . . . .. E.P.A. Convicted and fined $50 with $50 costs.. D.V.A. Defendant company pleaded guilty to two L.V.W. & S.B.

charges of breach of licence conditions and was fined $1,000 on each charge. Pleaded guilty to one charge of unlicensed discharge of waste and was fined $200. All other charges withdrawn. Costs fixed by consent at $800

Convicted and fined $250 with 560 costs.. D.V.A. Charge one fined $1,000 with $300 costs. L.V.W. & S.B.

Charge two withdrawn Convicted and fined $100 with $50 costs.. E.P.A. Convicted and fined $500 with $155 costs D.V.A. Convicted and fined $400 with $70 costs.. D.V.A. Convicted and fined 5200 with $60 costs.. D.V.A. Convicted and fined $500 with $70 costs.. E.P.A. Convicted and fined $200 with $100 costs. D.V.A. Convicted and fined $1,000 with $200 costs S.R. & W.S.C.

Convicted and fined $250 with $50 costs.. E.P.A. Convicted and fined $250 with $50 costs.. E.P.A. Convicted and fined $900 with $85 costs.. S.R. & W.S.C.

Convicted and fined $700 with $85 costs.. S.R. & W.S.C.

Convicted and fined $20 with $40 costs.. S.R. & W.S.C. Defendant pleaded guilty to 3 charges and D.V.A.

remaining 12 charges withdrawn. Fined 51,000 on one charge and $500 on each of the other 2 charges. Total fine $2,000 $100 costs

Convicted and fined $250 with $150 costs D.V.A. Convicted and fined $500 with $75 costs.. E.P.A.

to ;: ~ -~.

,....., ..... .....

~ ..... (0 -..J 0) ~

§

~ -~.

'I \0 V"I

Defendant

lames Claude Evans .. Michael VilIani Vulcan Aust. Ltd.

Nick Alysandratos

Peter Alysandratos

Antonios Bozes

Steven Andreou .. George Weston Foods Ltd. .. .. Balhan Industrial Company Pty. Ltd ...

Wendouree Electroplating Co. Pty. Ltd.

I.C.I. Aust. Ltd.

Mordialloc Timber Co. Pty. Ltd.

Michaelis Bayley Ltd. . . . . Oxy Metal Industries (Aust.) Pty. Ltd.

Burvale Pty. Ltd.

lackdon Pty. Ltd.

Cells Pty. Ltd. Giseppe Comelli .. Cottees General Foods Ltd. .. Australian Fibreglass Pty. Ltd. ·Nowa Nowa Hotel Pty. Ltd.

Offence Court

Water pollution Apollo Bay .. Water pollution .. .. Shepparton .. Breach of licence conditions 3 Ferntree Gully

charges Unlicensed discharge of waste 2 Healesville



charges Unlicensed discharge cf waste Healesville Water pollution . . .. Ringwood Breach of licence conditions 6 Geelong

charges Breach of licence conditions 7 Ballarat

charges Air pollution Footscray

Breach of section 6 (1) Clean Mordialloc Air Act

Water pollution . . .. Footscray Breach of licence conditions 3 Lilydale

charges Breach of licence conditions 6 Ringwood

charges Breach of section 6 Clean Air Sunshine

Air Act

Unlicensed discharge of waste Dandenong Water pollution . . .. Daylesford Unlicensed discharge of waste Box Hill Unlicensed discharge of waste Dandenong ., Breach of licence conditions 3 Lakes Entrance

charges

The Olympic Tyre and Rubber Co. Pty. Breach of section 6 Clean Air Footscray Ltd. Act

lames Miller and Co. Pty. Ltd. Breach of section 6 Clean Air Brunswick Act

Kader Plastics Pty. Ltd. Unlicensed discharges 2 charges Broadmeadows

Apex Concrete Pty. Ltd. . . " Unlicensed discharge of waste Preston .. Australian Wallcovering Manufacturers Unlicensed discharge of waste 3 Ferntree Gully

Pty. Ltd. charges

Glen Iris Brick Consolidated Ltd. Water pollution Heidelberg

·Solicitors Whiting and Byrne of 440 Collins Street, Melbourne acted in this matter.

Date

7th October, 1975 17th October, 1975 24th October, 1975

29th October, 1975

29th October, 1975

29th October, 1975

29th October, 1975 30th October, 1975 31st October, 1975

6th November, 1975

23rd luly, 1975 2nd September, 1975 6th November, 1975 lOth November, 1975 ..

17th November, 1975 .. 20th November, 1975 ..

21st November, 1975 ..

24th November, 1975 ..

26th November, 1965 .. 28th November, 1975 .. 4th December, 1975 8th December, 1975 28th January 1976

3rd February, 1976

20th February, 1976

5th March, 1976

17th March, 1976 .. 7th November, 1975 part

heard 1st April, 1976

.. 6th April, 1976

Result Agency

Convicted and fined $400 with $282 costs S.R. & W.S.C. Convicted and fined $150 with $100 costs S.R. & W.S.C. Convicted and fined S200 on each of 3 D.V.A.

charges with SI00 costs Convicted and fined $150 on each of 2 E.P.A.

charges with $40 costs Convicted and fined $150 on each of 2 E.P.A.

charges with $40 costs Convicted and fined $150 on each of 2 E.P.A.

charges with $40 costs Convicted and fined $100 with $40 costs.. E.P.A. Convicted and fined $3,000 with $50 costs D.V.A. Convicted and fined $400 on each of 6 S.R. & W.S.C.

charges with $120 cost Convicted and fined $200 on each of 7 S.R. & W.S.C.

charges with $120 costs Charge dismissed E.P.A.

Charge dismissed E.P.A.

Convicted and fined $500 with $127 costs E.P.A. Convicted and fined $200 on each charge D.V.A.

with $120 costs Convicted and fined $250 on each charge D.V.A.

with $120 costs Facts found proved. Defendant company E.P.A.

discharged in entering into arecognizance pursuant to section 92 (6) Justices Act, in the sum of $200 to be of good behaviour till 22nd November, 1976

Convicted and fined $200 with $120 costs D.V.A. Convicted and fined $300 with $105 costs S.R. & W.S.C. Convicted and fined $100 with $200 costs E.P.A. Convicted and fined $300 with $250 costs D.V.A. Convicted and fined $1,000 on each of 2 L.V.W. & S.B.

charges and $800 on the third with $600 costs

Convicted and fined $400 E.P.A.

Charge dismissed $184.56 costs awarded E.P.A. against the informant

Convicted and fined $150 on each charge M.M.B.W. with $70 professional costs

Charge dismissed with $218.50 costs .. M.M.B.W. Charges found proved. Re 1st charge D.V.A.

further hearing adjourned pursuant to section 92 (6) Justices Act 1958 on defend-ant company entering into a recognizance in the sum of SI,ooo to be of good behav-iour and to re-appear on 1st April, 1977. Re 2nd and 3rd charges. Adjourned till a date to be fixed not later than 1st April, 1977. Defendant company order to pay S200 costs

Convicted and fined SI,500 with S120 costs M.M.B.W

-..J \0 0'1

to s:: ~ -§' ~

> C/l C/l

~ t::I.j

~ ~

§

~ -~.

Defendant Offence Court Date

Effraim Sztrochlic Breach of licence conditions 5 Ringwood charges

13th April, 1976

21st April, 1976 Neville Eric Berry Water pollution Mitta Mitta

F. & T. Electroplaters Pty. Ltd. Breach of licence condition .. Mordialloc .. 27th April, 1976

URBAN LAND COUNCIL ACTIVITIES.

(Question No. 71)

Mr. EDMUNDS (Ascot Vale) asked the Premier-

1. How many blocks of land have been sold by the Urban Land Council to date and what price has been received by the council for each block?

2. How many blocks of land the council expects to place on the market this year and how many blocks of land it presently holds?

3. What is the total value and cost, respectively, of all the land presently held by the council, what proportion of funds has been supplied by the Commonwealth Government and how this compares with the State's contribution?

4. What qualifications of applicants are required by the council before selling land, and whether these qualifications are under review?

5. Whether he will provide all types of council contract and sale documents to the member for Ascot Vale?

Mr. HAMER (Premier and Treasurer): The answer is-

1. 106 blocks have been sold for prices ranging from $11,350 to $12,682.

2. Projected works programme of the council envisages production of approxi· mately 1,000 blocks over the next twelve months. The rate of production will, of course, depend on forthcoming loan allocations from the Commonwealth Government. At present the Urban Land Council has only six unsold lots.

3. At this date, approximately $7 million has been expended in the purchase of 354 hectares of land. At present, negotiations are nearing completion for the purchase of an additional 270·1 hectares at an approximate price of $4'6 million.

On top of this expenditure there has been an amount of $5,126,000 expended on development of urban blocks, administration and operating expenses of the council.

Urban Land Council operation is totally financed by Commonwealth loan funds. There is no State contribution. The council is responsible for redemption of the loans, with interest, through sale of de': veloped blocks.

Result Agency

Convicted and fined $300 on each charge D.V.A. with $150 costs

Convicted and fined $500 with $100 costs. S.R. & W.S.C Orders made pursuant to section 64 that:

(a) Defendant remove pigs from site within 7 days

(b) demolish and remove the sites within 30 days; and

(c) restrain free ranging pigs from access to the creek

Convicted and fined $200 with $94.50 costs M.M.B.W.

4. There are no qualifications for applicants purchasing residential lots from the Victorian Urban Land Council. Conditions of contract of sale are-

(a) Individual lot purchaser-Purchaser shall within three years from the date of the contract of sale erect or cause to be erected on the land purchased, a house for his own occupation.

(b) Building companies.-l. The purchaser shall within two years from the date of purchase erect or cause to be erected a house for disposal by sale. 2. In any sale of the house erected by the purchaser, the price of the land shall not exceed the price paid under contract of sale and the purchaser shall produce to the vendor (U.L.C.) a certificate signed by himself and the purchaser to whom the land has been sold setting out in detail the cost of the land and the building thereon.

tC

~ .... 6' ~ ~

r-"I --~ -CD ....:J O'l

..:....

§

~ .... ~.

....:J \0 ....:J


5. Yes; copies have been forwarded to the member for Ascot Vale.

LIQUEFIED GASES. (Question No. 103)

Mr. AMOS (Morwell) asked the Minister of Mines-

1. How many incidents involving accidents, fires, explosions or accidental leakage associated with the storage or transportation of liquefied gases have been reported to the Mines Department during each of thp. past eight years?

2. What are the details of such incidents? 3. What action the department has taken

to minimize the risk of harm to the general public as a result of such incidents?

4. How many inspectors have been appointed in each of the past eight years to ensure confonnity to proper standards?

Mr. BALFOUR (Minister of Mines): The answer is-

1. 1968-4; 1969-3; 1970-Nil; 1971-1; 1972-2; 1973-6; 1974-5; 1975-5.

In addition there were a number of other incidents involving the use of liquefied petroleum gas obtained from small cylinders of the gas.

2 and 3. Details of the incidents and the action taken by the department are somewhat lengthy. A detailed statement will be supplied to the honorable member.

4. The staff of the department was augmented, partly to assist in the administration of the Inflammable Liquids Act and Regulations and for training in anticipation of the Liquefied Gases Act and Regulations, as follows-

1971-Industrial science officer 1 1972-Chemical engineer 1 1975-Mechanical engineer 1

Inspector of inflammable liquids 1

1976-Inspector of inflammable liquids 2

Vacancies exist for another two inspectors of inflammable liquids despite repeated advertisements.

The eight officers mentioned, along with four other existing professional officers, will be appointed inspectors of liquefied gases on the proclamatlon of the Act.

VENEREAL DISEASES. (Question No. 126)


In respect of the activities of the Commission of Public Health in relation to venereal diseases-( a} what staff, specifying

status, are employed at the Government Clinic or elsewhere; (b) what is the cost of maintenance of the building this financial year; and (c) whether any extensions of the service, either capital or recurrent, are proposed; if so, what extensions?


(a) The following staff are employed at the Government Clinic-

Health officer (venereal diseases) 1 Medical officer, Class M02 1 Medical officer 2 Trained nurses 5 Attendant (supervising) 1 Attendants 2 Assistant (V.D. laboratory) 1 Typist 1 Phannacist (part time) 1 Cleaner (part time) 1

(b) The Public Works Department is responsible for maintenance of the building and the cost of such maintenance is not presently available to my department. No major maintenance has been requested in view of the proposal to move the clinic.

(c) No extension at the present location is planned. It is proposed to transfer the whole service to 372 Little Lonsdale Street in 1977 when the Tuberculosis Branch moves to Enterprise House.

FOOTBALL GRANTS. (Question No. 154)

Mr. MUTTON (Coburg) asked the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation-

What are the items of expenditure of the Department of Youth, Sport and Recreation grant of $100,000 for the promotion of Australian rules football in the current financial year?


The amount of $120,000 has been approved from the Sports and Recreation Fund for promotion of Australian rules football in the current financial year. An amount of $100,000 was approved for the promotion of Australian rules football during the 1974-75 financial year.

The following allocations have been approved during the 1975-76 financial year-

$ 1. Under-16 school-boys'

Australian championships 1,737.00


2. Australian rules development - Catholic parish schools

3. Goal post fund 4. Modified rules demonstra-

tion 5. Junior football congress 6. Umpires' course in schools 7. Umpires' costs first 18 com

petitions, metopolitan technical schools and metropolitan high schools

8. Primary school clinics 9. Coaches' educational course

10. Australian football guide 11. Victorian State school-boys'

under-16 carnival 12. Victorian under-17 champion

ships 13. May vacation school-boys'

umpires' course 14. Australian under-17 national

carnival 15. Administration costs

Total

METCON SYSTEM. (Question No. 156)

$

1,000.00 12,000.00

405.00 610.00

2,500.00

6,000.00 8,000.00 3,000.00

3,000.00

5,000.00

5,000.00

350.00

2,000.00 35,000.00

85,602.00

Mr. MUTTON (Coburg) asked the Minister of Special Education, for the Chief Secretary-

1. Whether priorities for traffic signals within the metropolitan area under the Metcon system have been finalized?

2. Whether any of the following intersections within the City of Coburg are listed for traffic light signals in 1976-77-Bell and Elizabeth streets; Bell and Sussex streets; Bell Street and Reynolds Parade; and Bell Street and Cumberland Road?

Mr. SCANLAN (Minister of Special Education): The answer supplied by the Chief Secretary is-

1. Priorities for the installation of traffic signals within the metropolitan area under the Metcon system, which is the first stage of the State-wide programme of intersection control, have been finalized. The programme is being extended to the rest of the State and priorities are now being determined on a State-wide basis.

2. The intersection of Bell Street and Cumberland Road; Bell Street and Reynolds Parade and Bell and York streets have been included in the application made for funds, under the MITERS category of the Commonwealth Roads Grants Act 1974, for the installation of traffic lights in 1976-77.

REPORT ON AEROSOL PROPELLANTS. (Question No. 166)


1. When the Poisons Advisory Committee was asked to report on whether sales of ,aerosol propellants should be controlled?

2. When the committee reported to the Minister and what was the substance of the report?

3. What action the Minister has taken since?

4. Whether the Minister will make the files available to the member for Brunswick?


1. 9th October, 1975. 2. No report has yet been made to the

Minister of Health. The Poisons Advisory Committee is still considering the matter and consulting with other expert committees including the National Health and Medioal Research Council.

3. As advised in the answer to question No. 53 on the 29th April, 1976, the Minister of Health has established an ad hoc committee to inquire into the propellant problems of aerosols. The committee comprises medical and scientific officers of the Department of Health together with representatives of the departments of Agriculture, Mines, Labour and Industry and Consumer Affairs.

4. The Minister does not propose to make the files av,ailable until these investigations have been completed.

YOUTH ORGANIZATIONS IN GLENROY ELECTORATE.

(Question No. 173)

Mr. CULPIN (Glenroy) asked the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation-

What State financial ,assistance was given to youth organizations in the electoral district of Glenroy during the past financial year and what financial assistance was sought by these organizations?


The following organizations in the electoral district of Glenroy received assistance from the Youth Fund during the 1974-75 financial year-


Organization Type of Amount Grant grant sought received

$ $ 1. Glenroy Citizens Youth Group General 7,000.00 330.00 2. First and Second Glenroy Scouts Building 9,500.00 500.00 3. Fourth Glenroy Scouts (a) Building 249.00 150.00

(b) General 1,000'00 80·00 4. Eighth Glenroy Scouts General 454.44 80.00 5. Hadfield Girl Guides Local General No actual 190.00

Association amount requested 6. Oak Park Girl Guides Building 1,800.00 1,800.00 7. Oak Park Youth Club (a) Building 1,000.00 1,000.00

(b) General 3,710.00 230.00

In addition a grant was made to the following organization for a detached youth worker to work in the Broadmeadows area.

Broadmeadows Youth Services Group Total

3,500.00 7,860.00

HOUSING COMMISSION PENSIONER FLATS.

(Question No. 211)

Mr. TREZISE (Geelong North) asked the Minister of Housing-

1. What is the present waiting list for Housing Commission pensioner-flat accommodation in the Geelong area?

2. What land, if any, is set aside at present for the construction of such flats in the area?

3. When it is expected that such works will commence?

Mr. HA YES (Minister of Housing)~ The answer is-

1. Pensioner-flat applications on hand number 215 (125 lone persons and 90 couples).

Waiting time averages eighteen months but varies between municipalities according to priorities allocated by local councils.

2. Land available for elderly persons' units is as follows-

Anglesea-Noble and Frazer streets. Drysdale-Elgin, Newcombe and Granville

streets.

Point Lonsdale-Nelson Road. West Geelong-Pakington Street. 3. Providing adequate funds are made

available, it is intended that all of these projects will be commenced during the coming financial year.

TEACHING SERVICE. (Question No. 225)

Mr. FORDHAM (Footscray) asked the Minister of Education-

1. How many classified positions in the Teaching Service were not filled in 1973, 1974, and 1975, respectively, indicating in which categories?

2. In each case, how many such positions were-(a) in the western suburbs; (b) in the northern suburbs; and (c) outside the Melbourne metropolitan area?

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education): The answer is-

In reply to an identical question asked during the 46th Parliament I advised the honorable member by letter dated the 30th March, 1976, as follows-

1 and 2. In respect of positions advertised-

PRIMARY SCHOOLS DMSION.

Total unfilled Principal V.P. Assistant .. Northern" "Western .. Country

1973 Special 31 6 12 1 Senior Teacher .. 103 20 14 37 Assistant Responsibility 4 22 5 17 Assistant No statistics available.

1974 Special 2 16 3 6 3 Senior Teacher .. 3 3 1 2 2 • Assistant Responsibility 74 5 2 Assistant 14 324 3 out of 4 in " Northern " or

"Western"

*Majority of vacancies were in special fields, no statistics kept as to what positions were in the Northern or Western suburbs.


Total unfilled Principal V.P. Assistant .. Northern" "Western .. Country

1975 Special 2 4 1 Senior Teacher .. .. 1 19 15 7 3 • Assistant Responsibility 2 104 3 16 5 Assistant 19 550 3 out of 4 in .. Northern" or

.. Western"

• A number of vacancies were in special fields.

1973 Principal Class Senior Teacher Class Assistant Class (P.O.R.) Asst. Class (Not P.O.R.)

1974 Principal Class Senior Teacher Class Assistant Class (P.O.R.) Assistant Class (Not P.O.R.) Relieving Assistant

1975 Principal Class Senior Teacher Class .. Assistant Class (P.O.R.) Assistant Class (Not P.O.R.) Relieving Assistant

1973 Principal Senior Teacher Assistant (P.O.R.) Assistant



SECONDARY SCHOOLS DMSION

Total unfilled positions .. Northern" .. Western "

43 164 607

8 164 642 90

1 35

109 342 220

TECHNICAL SCHOOLS DMSION

Total unfilled positions

9 17 56

141

10 17 98

106

4 40

158 100

12 30 67

3 30 71 35

18 58 32

.. Northern"

2 3

16 36

2 3

30 30

1 14 59 35

12 34 53

34 12 32

1 6

18 43 25

.. Western"

9 13

2 10 18

5 20 15

Country

16 79

392

2 79

398 5

27 47

163 111

Country

7 9

23 80

8 12 43 53

3 14 53 38

I should add that while these positions were unfilled by way of permanent appointments that does not mean that the positions were unoccupied during the year. The more senior positions are catered for by relieving

personnel or by teachers within the school on higher duty allowance. In the assistant class the position is filled by the posting of exit students or by temporary teachers.


TRAINING OF APPRENTICES. (Question No. 228)


With regard to positions available to train apprentices at Victorian technical schools and coUeges-

1. How many positions there are at present in respect of each trade and each year of training in each trade?

2. How many further positions will be available in each case in 1976 and 1977, respectively?

Year 1 Trade

3. How many applicants for apprenticeship in each trade were unable to undertake training in 1975 due to the non-availability of positions in technical schools and colleges?


In reply to an identical question asked during the 46th Parliament, I advised the honorable member by letter dated 8th April, 1976, as follows-

1. The number of positions in respect of each trade and each year of training in 1975 was as follows-

Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

Metro. Country Metro. Country Metro. Country Metro. Country

Aircraft .. Auto Machinist Agriculture Boilermaking Bricklaying Bodymaking Breadmaking Butchering Blacksmithing Coppersmithing Cabinetmaking .. Chair and Couch Cooking Carpentry and Joinery Dental DrycJeaning Electroplating Electrical .. Fibrous Plastering Floor Finishing .. Footwear .. Fitting and Machining Glass-Flat Gardening Garment Hairdressing-Ladies Hairdressing-Men Instrument Making Jewellery Moulding Motor Mechanics Optical.. .. Plumbing and G.F. Polishing Panel Beating .. Pastry Cooking .. Printing .. Painting and Decorating Pattemmaking Plastering Radio Refrigeration .. Sewing Machine .. Shipwrighting Sheetmetal Signwriting Silversmithing Spinning Tradesman Painting Tradesman Trimming Textile .. Tilelaying

105 24

227 135 33 40

200 12 12

343 16

212 825 24 12 28

1120 36 24 45

1193 48

100 20

408 40 45 36 40

928 24

556 30

354 36

407 100 24 24

144 48 24 24

140 32 7 4

116 31 12 12

24 122 143

12

26

58 458

360

444

60

12

565

329

77

4

62

56

16

105 24

404 165 36 40

200 12 12

247 18

180 979

36 24 28

929 24 24 60

955 30

100 20

408 30 48 36 32

895 26

613 20

270 36

404 91 36 24

138 81 26 12

140 24

3 2

119 32 12 12

24

158

12

26

58 550

370

460

40

12

609

303

77

3

50

56

210 24

333 120 24 40

12 12

160 18

120 706

24 12 28

688 36

702 37 60 20

408 30 28 24 22

616 44

471 22

251 36

314 65 24 10

112 40

12 118 24 2 2

71 22 12 12

119

14

48 395

298

395

30

12

423

311

59

3

50

28

609 217


Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Trade

Metro. Country Metro. Country Metro. Country Metro. Country

Upholstering Watchmaking Waiting Woodcarving Wood Machining

45 15 20

5 64

2. The anticipated over-all increase of apprentice positions for 1976 is 7·3 per cent (as compared with 5· 8 per cent in 1975). In fact the number of apprentices in training in 1976 represents an over-all increase of more than 20 per cent over the 1973 figure.

Significant specific increases already arranged are as follows-

Bricklaying 80 Carpentry and Joinery 130 Cabinetmaking 75 Furniture Trades 60 Motor Mechanics 240 Woodmachining 16

Additional positions which will become available with the completion of a number of annexes to be established are as follows-

Carpentry and Joinery 150 Cabinetmaking 80 Furniture Trades 40 Motor Mechanics 490 Panel Beating 144 Plumbing 150 Spray Painting 30 Sheetmetal 100 Woodmachining 16

With the completion of Moorabbin Technical College the following additional places will become available-

Electrical Trades Radio Trades

250 75

Precise information concerning additional places in 1977 will not be available until the annexes are completed.

3. Very small numbers of unplaced apprentices in a wide range of trades have been shown from time to time during 1975 in the records maintained by the Industrial Training Commission, but in many cases the lack of placement have been due to either the time-lag between the registration of apprentices and placement in schools or the reluctance of some apprentices to travel anything other than small distances. The significant number of unplaced apprentices are those shown below-

A~ru~re ~ (voluntary vide Industrial

Training Act section 41) Bricklaying 38 Cabinetmaking 34 Gardening 20 Hairdressing (Ladies) 138 Motor Mechanics 255 Spray Painting 54 Panel Beating 55

36 20 10

56

36 15

40

FUNDS FOR EDUCATION. (Question No. 229)

Mr. F'ORDHAM (,Footscray) asked the Minister of Education-

1. What funds were provided to Victoria by the Commonwealth Government through the Technical and Further Education CommISSIon for-( a) recurrent expenditure; and (b) capital expenditure; for each of the years 1973-74 and 1974-75 and what funds are to be provided for 1975-76?

2. In respect of each of the years referred to in part 1, what funds were provided by the Victorian Government for-(a) recurrent expenditure; and (b) capital expenditure, for technical and further education, as distinct from technical secondary schools?

Mr. THOMPSON (Minister of Education) : The answer is-

In reply to an identical question asked during ,the 46th Parliament I advised the honorable member by letter dared 9th April, 1976, as follows-

1 and 2. I desire to say that at the outset it must be remembered .that Victoria has a unique system of technical education whereby 75 per cent of TAFE operations are conducted in some 32 technical colleges and 25 per cent in some 75 technical schools. The wide spread of TAFE operations in a small State is made possible by the viability and economy provided by secondary technical operations in the technical schools in country areas. When it comes to assessing State contributions to T AFE, it is easy to overlook the contributions made by way of multi-purpose technical schools.

State contributions to TAFE comprise allocations for recurrent expenditure and allocations for capital works and services (which include land purchases, provision of temporary and short-run facilities, provision of permanent accommodation, provision of capital equipment and on-going maintenance and minor works).

Recurrent expenditure allocations contribute the major part of State contributions (because Commonwealth contributions have been non-existent until 1974 and then only relatively small).


Year State Commonwealth

$ million $ million 1973-4 31·315 1·772 1974-5 41·185 { 6·794

0·480 (Special app. training grant) 1975-6 50'000 9·1258

(est.) 0·600 (Special app. training grant) 1976 (July-Dec.) (Not determined) 4'532 (proposed)

To consider State contributions to capital expenditure without relating them to recurrent expenditure is to consider an unbalanced picture from which incorrect assumptions may readily be drawn.

Although Commonwealth recurrent expenditure allocations since 1973 contain the first Federal contributions to recurrent expenditure for TAFE development, a substan-

Year

1973-74 1974-75 1975-76

Because of the high level of commitment to recurrent expenditure, State contributions ID capital works and services have been much smaller. Furthermore, it tends to be overlooked because it is committed to a multiplicity of temporary and short-run facilities, minor works and maintenance and to the not-readily identifiable TAFE components of many multi~purpose technical

Year State

$ million 1973-74 1·195 1974-75 4·474

tial proportion of the recurrent funds is provided simply to replace fees which otherwise would have been paid by students attending TAFE classes. This proportion in fact makes no extra contribution towards the resources available for technical education. The net Commonwealth recurrent expenditure contribution to technical education is therefore-

Total Fee Net Federal recurrent reimbursement contribution

$ mi1lion $ mi1lion $ million 1·7 1·7 7·3 4·2 3 ·1 9·7 5'5 4·2

schools. On the other hand the somewhat moderate Commonwealth contributions are highlighted because they have, for most part, been used for readily identifiable facilities in TAFE coHeges.

The best estimates of State contributions as compared with Commonwealth contributions during recent years are as follows-

Commonwealth

$ million 5·500 (Comm. Tech. Trng. Grant)

{2'470 (Comm. Tech. Trng. Grant) 3·635 (TAFE)

1975-76 3·000 (est.) .. 6·776 (TAFE)

The Government's proposals for the 1976-77 financial year will include a minimum of $5 million for TAFE capital expenditure in technical colleges together additional indirect contributions to capital expenditure for technical schools being provided to release facilities for T AFE operations ( e.g. Swinburne Technical School, Mount Clear Technical High School and Baxter Technical School).

The Commonwealth contribution proposed for the remainder of 1976 is $4'403 million. The Commonwealth Government's decision on capital funding thereafter is awaited.

REGIONAL BUILDING PRIORITIES REVIEW COMMITTEES.

(Question No. 230)


With regard to the regional building priorities review committees-

1. How the committees are constituted? 2. Who are the members of the com

mittees? 3. What are the terms of reference?


4. When the committees came into operation?


In reply to an identical question asked during the 46th Parliament I advised the honorable member by letter dated the 9th April, 1976, as follows-

I now wish to advise you that the regional priorities review committees commenced operation in July, 1975, with the initial task of forward planning and setting priorities for maintenance and minor new works. As from February, 1975, the same committees have the additional task of formulating three-year works plans which will place all capital works proposals in relative priority within the region.

In recognition of the variety in the characteristics and composition of different school communities, the guidelines issued to regional directors simply required that the committees be-

(a) chaired at the regional level by the Regional Director of Education;

(b) chaired at the sub-district level by the District Inspector of Schools; and

( c) be representative of the school community concerned.

WORKERS COMPENSATION FOR INGLEWOOD HOSPITAL

EMPLOYEE. (Question No. 233)

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition) asked the Minister of Special Education, for the Chief Secretary-

Why the State Insurance Office is refusing to pay workers compensation to Mrs. P. L. Williams, an employee of the Inglewood Hospital?


The State Insurance Office, as insurer for the Inglewood Hospital, advised the employer in December, 1975, that the claim of Mrs. P. L. Williams should be admitted and payments have been made to the employer in accordance with the provisions of the Workers Compensation Act to this date.

BRAEDENE RIDING SCHOOL. (Question No. 236)

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition) asked the Minister of Labour and Industry-

Whether he will immediately investigate the Braedene Riding School of Marong Road, Bendigo, to ensure that the school is paying

the correct award rates of pay to its employees and fulfilling all obligations in respect of workers compensation coverage; if not, why?

Mr. MACLELLAN (Minister of Labour and Industry): The answer is-

As the wages of employees of riding schools are not fixed by any determination of a wages board, it does not appear appropriate for an investigation to be undertaken by officers of my department. The matter of workers compensation is one for con· sideration by the Chief Secretary.

ALLOCATION OF HOUSING COMMISSION HOMES.

(Question No. 238)

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition) asked the Minister of Housing-

1. Why the approval for Mrs. M. Y. Hudson, of 9 Benley Street, St. Arnaud, to receive a Housing Commission home has been cancelled?

2. Whether the approval will be immediately reinstated; if not, why?

Mr. HA YES (Minister of Housing): The answer is-

1. The commission guarantees applicants confidentiality in such matters.

2. The approval has been reinstated and the allocation of a house will be made when a suitable vacancy occurs.

(Question No. 239)


l. When Mrs. Maher, of 205 Forest Street, Bendigo, will receive a Housing Commission home?

2. What is the delay in providing housing for Mrs. Maher?


1. Mrs. J. Maher's application for Housing Commission accommodation was received on 5th January, 1976, and it is anticipated that a further period of at least twelve to fifteen months will elapse before assistance is available.

2. The number of prior applications on hand.


BENDIGO HOUSING COMMISSION OFFICE.

(Question No. 240)


When the new regional Housing Commission office will be opened in Bendigo?

Mr. HAYES (Minister of Housing): The answer is-

The office was opened on 1st March, 1976. Since then, some commission staff have

occupied the regional office at Bendigo and action is now being taken to secure the appointment of additional staff to bring it up to the full establishment.

ALLOCATION OF HOUSING COMMISSION HOME.

(Question No. 241)


1. When Mrs. J. I. Du tton , of 322 Eaglehawk Road, lronbark, will receive a Housing Commission home?

2. What is the delay in providing housing for Mrs. Dutton?


1. Mrs. J. I. Dutton's application for Housing Commission accommodation was received on 4th November, 1974, and it is anticipated that a further period of at least four months will elapse before assistance is available.

2. The number of prior applications on hand, together with the slow turnover of 2-bedroom units.

CHANDRIS LINES (AUST.) PTY. LTD.

(Question No. 243)

Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the Opposition) asked the Minister of Consumer Affairs-

Whether he will instigate an investigation into why Chandris Lines (Aust.) Pty. Ltd., 155 Collins Street, Melbourne, refuse to refund to Mr. W. Clarke, of Pattison Street, Bendigo, a fare he paid to travel to England on the Ellinis on 25th January, 1976, and why Mr. Clarke was taken only as far as New Zealand before being returned to Australia?

Mr. MACLELLAN (Minister of Consumer Affairs): The answer is-

I understand that Mr. Clarke has not so far lodged a complaint with the Consumer Affairs Bureau. If Mr. Clarke wishes to do so he may lodge particulars of his complaint with the Consumer Affairs Bureau where they will be examined and, if warranted, an investigation will be carried out.

FOUNDRY REGULATIONS. (Question No. 247)

Mr. GINIFER (Keilor) asked the Minister for Conservation-

1. When the current Environment Protection Authority regulations will come into force in respect of foundries?

2. Whether the regulations are to be applied uniformly throughout Victoria?

3. By what date all foundries are required to comply with the regulations and whether, from that date, all Government contracts will be let only to foundries complying with such regulations; if not, why?

4. Whether the foundries operated by all statutory authorities comply with these regulations; if not, which foundries do not comply and why?


No regulations under the Environment Protection Act have been made which apply specifically to foundries.

ELIGIBILITY FOR HOUSING COMMISSION HOMES.

(Question No. 252)

Mr. EDMUNDS (Ascot Vale) asked the Minister of Housing-

1. When the last adjustment was made to the income level for Housing Commisr'rm applicants in respect of the $2 allowance for families with three children used for determining an applicant's total income?

2. When this formula commenced, indicating under what authority, and when it is considered that the allowance will be increased in regard to the third child and additional children?

3. Whether the Government will consider altering the eligibility to apply from the second child; if not, why?


1, 2 and 3. No adjustment has been made since the 1973 Housing Agreement commenced on the 1st January, 1974.


All aspects of the ,agreement will be discussed at a conference of Ministers of Housing scheduled to be held in Canberra on the 24th May, 1976.

HOUSING COMMISSION EVICTIONS.

(Question No. 253)

Mr. DOUBE (Albert Park) asked the Minister of Housing-

In each year from 1965 to 1975 inclusive-1. How many actions for evictions of

Housing Commission tenan ts have been initiated in-( a) Magistrates Courts; and (b) the Supreme Court?

2. What is the reason for taking action through the Supreme Court in preference to the Magistrates Courts?


1. (a) The following statistics, which have only been kept since 1968-69, show the number of notices to quit served which could have led to action being tak'en in the Magistrates Court-

1968-69, 5,325; 1969-70, 5,442; 1970-71, 6,389; 1971-72, 5,850; 1972-73, not available; 1973-74, 5,275; 1974-75, 2,805.

(b) Nil. 2. Not applicable.

AUSTRALIAN PAPER MANUFACTURERS LTD.

(Question No. 255)

Mr. CATHIE .(Carrum) asked the Minister for Conservation-

If he will lay on the table of the Library the file relating to the issuing of waste discharge licences to Australian Paper Manufacturers Ltd., together with all relevant correspondence?


I would certainly' be happy to make the relevant file avaIlable to the honorable member if he could advise me of the particular plant and type of licence he has in mind.

ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION APPEAL BOARD HEARINGS.

(Question No. 256)

Mr. CATHIE (Carrum) asked the Minister for Conservation-

Whether, during any meeting or sitting of the Environment Protection Appeal Board(a) any member has been insulted during a

hearing or while he has been on his way to or from any such hearing; (b) any person has misconducted himself within the premises in which any hearing was being conducted; (c) any person has wilfully and without lawful excuse interrupted any such hearing; (d) any person has unlawfully assaulted or wilfully obstructed any person present at such hearing; or (e) any person has, without lawful excuse, disobeyed a lawful direction given to him by the board during such hearing-if so, who was the person in each case, and what action was taken?


No.

HOUSING COMMISSION PENSIONER FLATS IN

WILLIAMSTOWN ELECTORATE. (Question No. 263)

Mr. STIRLING (WiIliamstown) asked the Minister of Housing

What is the present waiting list for Housing Commission pensioner-flat accommodation in the electoral district of WHliamstown?


The present waiting list for Housing Commission pensioner-flat accommodation in the electoral district of Williamstown is-

Lone person-One. Pensioner couples-Seven * .

* Includes three couples currently occupying accommodation in excess of their needs wishing to transfer to smaller accommodation.

WESTRALIAN HOLDINGS. (Question No. 266)

Mr. CRABB (Knox) asked the Treasurer-

Whether there is a relationship between the company named Westralian Holdings, in which the State Savings Bank of Victoria has purchased a 20·6 per cent interest for $1-5 million, and the company named Westralian International which is listed as a subsidiary or associated company of Continental lllinois National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago; if so, what is the relationship?

Mr. HAMER (Premier and Treasurer): The answer is-

Westralian International is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Westralian Holdings.

It is neither a subsidiary or associated company of Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago. The interest which that company had in Westralian International was relinquished on 7th June, 1972.


COBURG WEST PRIMARY SCHOOL.

(Question No. 267)

Mr. MUTTON (Coburg) asked the Minister of Education-

1. Whether the Public Works Department has finalized plans for the proposed reconstruction and renovation works for the Coburg West Primary School?

2. Whether funds will be made available in the 1976-77 financial year for the proposed works; if not, why?


1. Preliminary plans have been prepared and approved. Detailed working plans and specifications have not yet been completed.

2. This project is programmed to go to tender during the 1976-77 financial year subject to the amount of the allocation of loan funds from the Commonwealth Government.

PUBLIC OFFICES FOR GEELONG. (Question No. 269)

Mr. BIRRELL (Geelong asked the Minister of Works-

West) Public

In respect of the new public offices shortly to be erected in Geelong-

1. What is the estimated cost, completion date, and date of commencement of construction?

2. What departments will be housed in the new offices?

3. How many employees will be staffing the offices, indicating what proportion of these employees is expected to be transferees from outside Geelong and what proportion will be made up from public servants already employed in Geelong?

4. Whether a detailed press release was made on the above matters in recent weeks; if so, when?


1. $8, 5 million. I authorized the acceptance of the contract on Thursday, 7th May, 1976. The contractor will be given possession of the site as from 12th May, 1976, and completion is scheduled for June, 1978.

2. The following departments have been circularized in regard to their requirements for office accommodation at Geelong-

Agriculture; Crown Lands and Survey; Education; Ministry for Conservation; Health; Labour and Industry; Local Government; Chief Secretary's Office; Social Welfare; State Rivers and Water Supply Commission; State Development; Forests Com-

mission; Youth, Sport and Recreation; Transport Regulation Board; Ministry of Transport; Rural Finance and Settlement Commission; Liquor Control Commission; Ministry for the Arts; Public Trustee, Town and Country Planning Board; Workers Compensation Board; Ministry of Housing; Geelong Regional Planning Authority; Mines; Auditor-General; Public Works Department.

3. Specific details have not been received from the various departments. Each department would need to provide the information required in regard to numbers of employees that would be transferred from outside Geelong.

4. The Premier made a press statement on 18th March this year and I have made several in regard to this project.

DEPENDENT-RELATIVE FLATS. (Question No. 270)

Mr. MUTTON (Coburg) asked the Minister of Housing-

1. How many "granny flats" have been erected in the metropolitan area to date, indicating in which municipalities they have been erected?

2. Which municipalities have refused to co-operate in the scheme?


1. Thirty-three" granny units" have been erected in the metropolitan area to date, details being-

City of Sunshine 1 City of Keilor 3 City of Preston 3 City of Broadmeadows 1 Shire of Bulla 1 City of Heidelberg 2 City of Ringwood 2 City of Nunawading 2 City of Knox 1 City of Waverley 3 Shire of Lilydale 1 City of Frankston 2 City of Camberwell 2 City of Sandringham 2 City of Moorabbin 1 City of Doncaster 3 City of Springvale 1 City of Mordialloc

2. Prahran City Council has refused to issue a permit for "granny units" due to the fact that the unit is not brick, however, negotiations are taking place between the council and the commission to see if a unit with acceptable cladding could be constructed economically.


INTRUDER-DETECTION EXPERIMENT AT

COBURG SCHOOLS. (Question No. 273)

Mr. MUTTON (Coburg) asked the Minister of Public W orks-

What was the result of the intruderdetection experiment carried out last year at the Coburg high and Coburg West primary schools, respectively?


The library at Coburg High School is protected and the system went into operation at the beginning of October, 1974. Since then three entries have been attempted (2nd October, 1974, 14th October, 1974, and 14th December, 1974). On each occasion the alarm operated and the intruders quickly left without any theft. or damage other than the forced entry takmg place. No reported attempts have. taken place since that date. The system IS considered satisfactory.

The system installed in Coburg West Primary School was installed by the school committee but unfortunately there have been cases recently where entry has been gained to the school and the alarm has not been actuated.

TELEVISION CARTOON SERIES "LIFE-BE IN IT".

(Question No. 278)

Mr. B. J. EV ANS (Gippsland East) asked the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation-

1. What was the cost of producing !he Life-Be In It series of cartoons showmg on television, and what is the name and address of the production company?

2. On what television channels the series is being shown and what is the cost per advertisement in each case?

3. How long it is proposed to continue showing the SHies and what is the total budget, indicating the total cost of advertising on each channel?

4. What is the source of the funds used to finance this programme?


1. The total production cost of t~e LifeBe In It series of cartoon advertIsements was $39,434.59. Production was undertaken by Al et al Pty. Ltd., of 25 Palmerston Crescent, South Melbourne, through the campaign's advertising agents, Monahan, Dayman, Adams Pty. Ltd., of 578 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne.

2. The television channels being used are

Metropolitan

Country

ATVO GTV9 HSV7 AMV4 (Albury /Wodonga) BCV8 (Bendigo) BTV6 (Ballarat) GLVI0 (Traralgon) GMV6 (Shepparton) STV8 (Mildura)

The cost per advertisement in each case is-

Channel ATVO GTV9 HSV7 AMV4 BCV8 BTV6 GLVI0 GMV6 STV8

60 second $693.00 $675.00 $693.00 $81.00

$249.30 $283.50 $249.30 $283.50 $249.30

30 second $487.00 $450.00 $487.00

$66.60 $176.30 $225.00 $176.30 $225.00 $176.30

3. The current series of television advertisements will be screened up to and including the week commencing 4th July, 1976. The total value of television advertising time is $307,091.50 and the actual cost of advertising to the Department of Youth, Sport and Recreation is $72.841.50. The cost to the department for each television network is as follows-

ATVO $19,989.00 HSV7 $19,989.00 GTV9 $19,791.00

Sub Total $59,769.00 BCV8/GLVlO/STV8 $5,048.10 BTV6/GMV6 $5,841 .90 AMV4 $1,822.50

Sub Total $12,712.50 The Broadcasting Control Board has

classified the advertisements as being a "community service announcement" and the above television networks have contributed free of charge advertising time to the value of $234,250.

4. The Life-Be In It programme is financed from the Sports and Recreation Fund and financial support has also been provided by the Commonwealth Government.

MELBOURNE CITY ABATIOIR AND NEWMARKET SALE-YARDS.

(Question No. 281)

Mr. JONES (Melbourne) asked the Minister of Agriculture-

1. Whether the Government intends to retain the Melbourne City Abattoir as a viable operation for the indefinite future and whether it intends to bring the abattoir up to export licence standard; if so, who will be responsible for a capital works programme which has })een estimated to cost $10·9 million?


2. Whether the Government intends to retain the Newmarket sale-yards as a viable operation for the indefinite future; if not-(a) where the sale-yards are likely to be relocated; (b) what the Government intends to do with the vacant Crown land; and (c) whether the Government will implement the recommendations of the strategy plan in respect of the sale-yards site; if not, who will be responsible for meeting the costs of Environment Protection Authority requirements?

Mr. I. W. SMITII (Minister of Agriculture): The answer is-

1. The Melbourne City Abattoir is owned by the City of Melbourne and leased to Protean Enterprises (Newmarket) Pty. Ltd.

In discussions between the city council and the Government in December last year, it was agreed that it is not economically practicable to make any major structural alterations to the abattoir; that there exists in Victoria sufficient killing capacity in good standard works to handle the Melbourne City Abattoir throughput and that, in the light of this. Melbourne City Abattoir will be phased out.

The Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority was requested to report on this matter, and the authority has produced a plan to phase out the city abattoir. This plan has been made available to Protean Enterprises and the Melbourne City Council, with a view to discussion with the Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority.

2. The policy of the Government, as announced prior to the last election, is to establish a working party to investigate and prepare outline plans for the transfer of the Newmarket sale-yards. The provision of a service abattoir in conjunction with new sale-yards will also be studied.

HOUSING COMMISSION LAND IN SUNSHINE ELECTORATE.

(Question No. 282)

Mr. FOGARTY (Sunshine) asked the Minister of Housing-

1. Whether the Housing Commission has leased or sold areas of land in Carlton Street, Braybrook, to be used as a car park serving the Braybrook Hotel, Ballarat Road, Braybrook; if so-( a) what are the terms of lease or sale; and (b) whether the lease or sale has affected land previously a part of a Housing Commission home or had any effect upon the possible future purchase by the present occupiers?

2. What other areas of commission land within the electoral district of Sunshine have been leased or sold to persons other than the occupier?


1. (a) The commission has leased to James Richardson Pty. Ltd. an area of 50 feet by 200 feet at the rear of lots 434 to 437 (both inclusive) on plan of subdivision 59057, Carlton Street, Braybrook, for a period of five years from the 13th April, 1972. at a rental of $432 per annum for the purposes of a car park in connection with the Braybrook Hotel, Ballarat Road, Braybrook.

(b) To enabl,e the sale of any of the four commission houses situated on lots 434 to 437, it will be necessary to have a plan of subdivision approved by the Registrar of Titles, excising the area from the four properties.

2. A 14-ft. strip was excised from the frontage of a tenanted commission unit at 13 Dodd Street, Braybrook and sold to the Country Roads Board in connection with the construotion of a pedestrian overpass on Ballarat Road.

HOUSING COMMISSION HOUSES IN BROADMEADOWS.

(Question No. 284)

Mr. WILTON (Broadmeadows) asked the Minister of Housing-

1. How many Housing Commission houses, excluding those allocated for the armed services, have been built in the City of Broadmeadows in the past five years, indicating the number for each year?

2. How many of the above houses have been allotted for-(a) rental; and (b) sale?


Year

1970-71 1971-72 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75

Houses built No. sold

277 277 285 285 62 59

120 112 268 234

CHEESE IMPORTS. (Question No. 285)

No. rented

3 8

34


In each year from 1973 to 1975, inclusive. what were the cheese imports and value of cheese imports, respectively. into-(a) Victoria; and (b) Australia?

Questions [11 MAy, 1976.] on Notice. 811

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture): The answer is-The following infunnation details the value and quantity of cheese imports relative

to (a) Victoria (b) Australia on the basis of financial years 1972-73 to 1974-75, inclusive--

CHEESE IMPORTS (CHEDDAR AND NON-CHEDDAR VARIETIES)

Victoria Australia

financial year July ht-June 30th Volume Value Volume Value (tonnes) SA (tonnes) SA

1972-73 4,178'9 4,497,118 7,508'8 7,435,710 1973-74 4,144'0 4,785,105 7,420'9 8,881,901 1974-75 3,908'0 5,951,189 7,998'5 11,806,812

Total 1972/73-1974/75 12,230'9 15,233,412 22,928'2 28,124,423

Source: Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics.

NOTE: The Victorian figures represent the total of imports into this State at the port of entry. Some of these imports would be transported for sale interstate but no information is available as to the actual 1uantities.

UPDATING OF ABATTOIRS AND MEAT WORKS. (Question No. 286)


Whether the Victorioan Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority has ordered certain private/municipal abattoirs or meat works within the metropolitan area and/or provincial cities to update their works or alternatively cease operations; if so-(a) what date the directions were given ·and to which works; and (b) what is the deadline date applying to each of the abattoirs or meat works?


The Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority has power to suspend or cancel licences where works or repairs or installations specified in a notice issued under the Act have not been completed within a time specified in the notice.

The authority has not served any notice on the licensee of any licensed meat establishment in the State specifying works or repairs or installations required to be executed or specifying the time within which the works or repairs or installations are to be completed.

At the time of issue of each licence, covering an export abattoir, a local abattoir, or a slaughterhouse, the authority has drawn attention of the licensee to the general requirements and minimum stand~ ards set down in the legislation in relation to the particular licence.

Over the last eighteen months the authority has surveyed the standards of premises in the State where stock are

slaughtered for human consumption, and has graded these premises as "good", "moderate", or "bad".

The authority is at present engaged in forwarding advice to each licensee of the major deficiencies at the particular works in relation to the standards set out in the legislation and seeking advice from the licensee of his plans for the premises and an indication of the time schedule over which the licensee proposes to implement any plans for upgrading the premises.

This notification of major deficiencies invites the licensee to discuss any problems he may have with senior staff of the Meat Inspection Branch of the Department of Agriculture.

MELBOURNE CITY ABATTOIR. (Question No. 287)


1. Whether the Melbourne City Abattoir is subject to decision by the Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority; if so, whether the authority has determined the cost for bringing the abattoir up to export licence standard and, in that event, what is the estimated cost?

2. Whether the Melbourne City Council carried out an independent survey on the upgrading of abattoirs which indicated that the estimated cost would be $10'9 million?


1. The Melbourne City Abattoir is licensed as a local abattoir, Licence No. L.59; the licence having been issued by the Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority.

The authority is not costing organization and has not determined any costs in relation to any proposal to upgrade the Melbourne City Abattoir.

At my request, the Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority has prepared a plan for the phase-out of the Melbourne City Abattoir. This plan has been made available to the Lord Mayor of Melbourne


and to Protean Enterprises (Newmarket) Pty. Ltd. for consideration, and with a view to discussion with the authority.

2. On 27th November, 1975, the Town Clerk of the City of Melbourne advised the secretary of the Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority that the council had engaged a consulting engineer to cost the work required at the abattoir, and the estimate submitted by him was some $11 million.

(Question No. 288)


1. Whether the Melbourne City Council and the appropriate Government authorities intend to keep the Melbourne City Abattoir open indefinitely or phase out the works over a given period?

2. Whether the council entered into negotiations with Protean Enterprises (Newmarket) Pty. Ltd., for a new lease of the abattoir with further options; if so:(a) what are the terms of the lease; (b) what is the period of the lease options; (c) what are the maintenance requirements; and (d) who accepts the financial responsibility for bringing works up to export licence standard?

3. Whether it is the intention of the Government to build a new works or utilize another works as an essential service abattoir within the metropolitan area once the Melbourne City Abattoir is phased out?


At my request, the Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority has prepared a plan for the phase-out of the Melbourne City Abattoir. This plan has been made available to the Lord Mayor of Melbourne and to Protean Enterprises (Newmarket) Pty. Ltd. for consideration, and with a view to discussion with the authority.

2. I am advised by the Melbourne City Council that it has entered into negotiations with Protean Enterprises (Newmarket) Pty. Ltd., for a new lease of the abattoir with further options.

(a) On the assumption that by "terms" is meant rent, the answer is $200,000 a year, with provision for annual variation (upwards only) in accordance with the Consumer Price Index All Groups Index Numbers for Melbourne.

(b) The period of the lease is five years, with an option for a further five years.

(c) The lessee is to be responsible at its expense for maintaining the abattoirs in no worse condition than they were when it first entered into a lease in 1969.

(d) The financial responsibility for meeting any requirements of the Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority under the Abattoir and Meat Inspection Regulations 1974 will lie with the lessee. However, in the event of the lessee being required to expend moneys on capital works, it will be able to apply to the council for financial relief. If relief is refused, the lessee will be able to determine the lease on the giving of six months' notice of its intention to do so.

3. It is not the intention of the Government to build any new meat works in the State.

Any construction of new works to provide a service abattoir within the metropolitan area would be a matter for private industry.

CONSUMER AFFAIRS COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS.

(Question No. 292) Mr. ROPER (Brunswick) asked the

Minister of Consumer Affairs-Further to the answer to question No. 9

asked on 4th May, 1976, whether he will make available the file to the member for Brunswick?


Yes. The files relating to date marking of packaged. foodstuffs and labelling of fruit juices and fruit juice drinks will be made avaliable to the member for Brunswick at my office. If the honorable member contacts my private secretary he will arrange for the files to be made available.

ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION APPEAL BOARD. (Question No. 293)

Mr. CATHIE (Carrum) asked the Minister for Conservation-

Who are the present members of the Environment Protection Appeal Board and what are the qualifications of each member?

Mr. BORTHWICK (M'inister for Conservation): The answer is-

Section 8 of the Environment Protection Act 1970, as amended provides that-

" (i) The Environment Protection Appeal Board shall consist of not more than six members appointed by the Governor in Council on the nomination of the Minister of whom-(a) one shall be a barrister and solicitor;

and (b) the others shall be persons experi

enced in environmental control or management.

(ii) The Governor in Council shall appoint one of such persons to be Chairman of the Board."

Questions [11 MAy, 1976.] on Notice. 813

The present members of the Appeal Board appointed under the above provision and their qualifications are as follows:-Chairman-

Mr. P. H. N. Opas, O.B.E., Q.C., LL.M (Mon.) LL.B. (Melb.).

Mr. Opas is, of course, an eminent Queen's Counsel in this State, and among his other appointments was Judge Advocate General in the Royal Australian Air Force from 1958 to 1969. Members-

Mrs. M. Avdiev, Bachelor of Architecture; registered architect; Fellow, Royal Australian Institute of Architects.

Mrs. A vidiev is also a part-time tutor with the Department of Architecture, University of Melbourne.

Mr. A. M. Clark, B.A. (Hons.) in Natural Science (Oxford) B.Sc. (post graduate), F.I. Chem. E., C. Eng.

Mr. Clark has been an external examiner in chemical engineering for the Imperial College, London, and acted as expert for the marine board of inquiry into the explosion on the Western Spruce.

Professor S. R. Siemon, B. Sc., M. App. Sc., M.E., C. Eng., F.I. Chem., E., F.R.A.C.L, F.I.E. (Aust.), M. Int. F.

Professor Siemon is Dean of the Faculty of Engineering, University of Melbourne.

Mr. G. J. Towers, O.B.E., D.C.E., (R.M.I.T.) F.I.E. (Aust.) (graduate) Australian Administrative Staff College.

Mr. Towers was formerly Assistant Director-General of Works and subsequently Associate Commonwealth Director of Works for Victoria and Tasmania Region.

There is currently one vacancy on the board.

CHELSEA POLICE STATION. (Question No. 294)

Mr. CATHIE (Carrum) asked the Minister of Special Education, for the Chief Secretary-

1. What are the normal operating hours of the Chelsea police station?

2. On which days the station closes early, indicating the closing times?

3. What additional staff is required to keep the station open to 11.00 p.m. on weekdays and to midnight on Saturdays?

4. When it is expected that additional staff will be supplied?


1, 2 and 3. The normal operating hours of the Chelsea police station are-

(a) Sunday to Friday (inclusive)-7 a.m. to 11 p.m.

Session 1976.-28

(b) Saturday-7 a.m. to 12 midnight.

Although the operating hours are as set out above, there are times during these hours when the station is temporarily closed because of certain duties performed, e.g., after 5 p.m. the afternoon shift of one or two members is required to attend to calls and other police duties in the sub-district.

At present the station has a personnel strength of-

1 Senior sergeant; 3 Sergeants; 7 Senior constables or constables 1 Reservist; and 1 Typist.

It would be necessary to increase the staff by three constables to keep the station open for all its normal operating hours.

The Chelsea police sub-district is also serviced by mobile units, including a divisional van, the Crime Car Squad, the Mobile Traffic Section and the Crimin,al Investigation Branch. These units provide a 24-hour coverage of the sub-district.

4. It is not proposed to appoint additional staff to the Chelsea police station at this stage as it is considered that, compared with other police stations of similar size, the station is adequately staffed at present.

MEDIBANK. (Question No. 295)

Mr. JONES (Melbourne) asked the Assistant Minister of Health, for the Minister of Health-

In respect of the $84' 454 million paid to the Government by the Commonwealth under the Medibank Hospitals Agreement for the period ended February, 1976-

1. How these funds have been paid and to whom?

2. What amount has been set aside for payments to surgeons, indicating to what purpose these reserved funds have been applied pending payments?


1. Sums received from the Commonwealth Government towards the CommonwealthState Cost Sharing Agreement are paid by State Treasury into the Commonwealth Assistance Medibank Trust Fund.

Payments from this fund together with the State Government contribution from the Hospitals and Charities Fund and other State Government sources ,are paid monthly by State Treasury to the recognized hospitals as set out in the CommonwealthState Cost Sharing Agreement.


2. For the period 1st August, 1975, to 29th February, 1976, an amount of $7·092 million was paid to hospitals to meet the cost of ordinary on call and administrative sessions for all visiting medical staff including surgeons.

Pending payment, any amounts which have not been paid to visiting medical staff and surgeons would be held in each individual hospital's operating bank account.

BELMONT POLICE STATION. (Question No. 301)

Mr. BIRRELL (Geelong West) asked the Minister of Special Education, for the Chief Secretary-

Regarding the possible reopening of Belmont police station, what were the results of the 1975 inquiry into the police needs of the suburbs of Geelong south of the Barwon River?

Mr. SCANLAN {Minister of Special Education): The answer supplied by the Chief Secretary is-

The survey into the future policing needs of the Geelong police district, which includes the City of South Barwon, is still in progress. It is expected that the survey will be completed by July, 1976. A decision will then be made whether the Belmont police station is to be reopened.

EXPLOSIVES BRANCH LABORATORY AT ALTONA.

(Question No. 304)

Mr. STIRLING (Williamstown) asked the Minister of Mines-

1. What use is made of the Explosives and Gas Examining Branch laboratory at Truganina Reserve, Altona?

2. Whether laboratory equipment is kept at the site?

3. On how many occasions the laboratory was used in the past twelve months?

4. Whether consideration has been given to the transfer of these facilities to Point Wilson?

Mr. BALFOUR (Minister of Mines): The answer is-

1. The Explosives and Gas Examining Branch of the Mines Department uses the Truganina Reserve at Altona for the following purposes-

(a) physical testing, including detonation, of explosives;

(b) storage of small quantities of explosives;

(c) destruction of defective explosives;

(d) work associated with improvised explosive devices;

(e) testing of applicants for permits to use explosives;

(f) destruction of small quantities of hazardous materials from various sources;

(g) miscellaneous work for this and other departments;

(h) demonstrating the properties of explosives and other hazardous materials during training courses; and

(i) testing of liquefied petroleum gas where isolated open space is necessary.

2. Very little portable equipment is left in the buildings because of repeated acts of vandalism. Additional equipment is taken to the area as required. There is certain fixed equipment for the testing of explosives.

3. During 1975 officers of the branch carried out work at the reserve on 79 days; on many of these occasions more than one type of work was carried out and several officers were involved. From 1st January to 10th May, 1976, officers worked at the reserve on 31 days.

4. No. The Point Wilson area is Commonwealth-owned and the activities carried on at Altona should not be in the same area as large scale handling of explosives.

MANUFACTURE OF BUTIERlNE. (Question No. 308)


1. How much butterine (dairy blend) has been manufactured in Victoria during the past twelve months?

2. Which factories manufacture such butterine?

3. Whether manufacturers are dependent upon overseas purchases for plant?


1. 1058 lb. of dairy blend have been manufactured in the last twelve months at the Gilbert Chandler Institute of Dairy Technology.

2. No factory has manufactured dairy blend during the last twelve months.

3. The product was manufactured through the normal butter manufacturing plant purchased through local agents.

Some butter manufacturing equipment (churns) was imported by agents and some was manufactured locally.

At the present, with modern buttermaking using continuous buttermakers, all

equipment is imported.


SEWERAGE CONNECTION TO BALLARAT EAST PROPERTY.

(Question No. 310)

Mr. GINIFER (Keilor) asked the Minister for Conservation, for the Minister of Water Supply-

Further to the answer to question No. 246 asked on 5th May, 1976-

1. What is the estimated cost of providing reticulated sewerage facilities to the property situated at 117 Joseph Street, Ballarat?

2. What capital contribution is expected from the property owner?

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister for Conservation): The answer supplied by the Minister of Water Supply is-

1. $9,760. 2. $4,240.

ADVERTISING BY SELF SERVICE WHOLESALERS PTY. LTD.

(Question No. 317)

Mr. CRABB .(Knox) asked the Minister of Consumer Affairs-

1. Whether he is aware that Self Service Wholesalers Pty. Ltd. has been advertising in the media for several weeks that their stores are "Research Proven! Still the Cheapest" while the research on which this claim is based concerns only a select list of goods which are designated " specials" in S.S.W. stores rather than a representative sample as is used in the Consumer Price Index?

2. What action he intends taking on this matter?


1. No. 2. If the honorable member is able to

give me the particulars, I will arrange for t~e matter to be examined by the ActingDIrector of Consumer Affairs.

MARYBOROUGH HIGH SCHOOL. (Question No. 322)

Mr. AUSTIN (Ripon) asked the Minister of Education-

1. What priority has been given to the rebuilding programme at Ma rybo rough High School in respect of the upgrading of staff administration quarters?

2. When it is expected work on the project will commence?


1 and 2. The project to provide staffadministration improvements together with a science room, four class-rooms and covered way at Maryborough High School has been considered by the Ballarat Region Priority Review Committee.

The priority is such that it is not expected to proceed during the 1976-77 financial year. It is not possible at this stage to say when the project will commence. However, the situation will become clearer once the allocation of loan funds from the Commonwealth Government is known.

mtgislntiut C!tnUutU. Wednesday, May 12, 1976.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett) took the chair at 2.33 p.m., and read the prayer.


FORESTS COMMISSION BUILDING AT NEWPORT.

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT (Melbourne West Province): Can the Minister of Forests advise whether a final decision has been made on the removal of the building owned by the Forests Commission at Market Street, Newport? If so, what is the decision?

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER (Minister of Forests): No final decision has been made. However, in view of the question, I will be prepared to discuss this tomorrow with the Forests Commission.


The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH (Doutta Galla Province): I ask the Chief Secretary whether a firm decision has been made by the Government in relation to increasing third-party insurance premiums and, if so, whether he is at liberty to advise the House of the proposed increase.

816 Questions [COUNCIL.] without Notice.

The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary): No decision has been made by the Government concerning third-party premiums. As I advised last week, we have referred back the recommendations of the third-party insurance Premiums Committee for consideration. I am hopeful that a further report from that committee will be forthcoming within the next fortnight. The Government will then make a decision on what any increase in third-party premiums might be.

I also advise that the Government is setting up a board of judicial inquiry to look at all aspects of thirdparty insurance, to find out why this insurance appears to be so costly in Victoria in comparison with the other States. The Government hopes to get a recommendation from the judicial inquiry on a form of restructuring so that premiums can be brought down to a more realistic level.

ECHUCA PORT RESTORATION.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE (Northern Province): In view of the uncertainty regarding the finances available for the Echuca port restoration project and the fact that the city council has called a meeting for 7th June, 1976, will the Minister for State Development and Decentralization within the next few days make available to me and my fellow members a statement concerning the funds that are presently available for the project and those that are likely to be available within the period ahead?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister for State Development and Decentralization): I will endeavour to make the information requested available to the honorable member.

MUNICIPAL RATING EXEMPTIONS.

The Hon. J. M. WALTON (Melbourne North Province): Is the Minister for Local Government aware that people who own blocks of land, such as those at the Country Club estate at Paynesville, and who are precluded from building because of an interim development order, still have

to pay municipal rates? Will the Minister consider asking the municipalities concerned to waive the rates in these cases?

The Hon. A. J. HUNT (Minister for Local Government): I am aware that any owner of land must pay rates, whatever restrictions may be imposed upon it. However, I am also aware of the particular problem in areas where there are moratoriums on building pursuant to planning schemes. In that regard I refer the honorable member to my remarks on the Local Government (Rates) Amendment Bill in this House last week.

REMAND CENTRE.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH (Doutta Galla Province): I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Social Welfare whether it is still firm Government policy to build the new remand centre within the confines of the City of Melbourne and, if it is, when it is expected that work will commence.

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health): It is Government policy to build a new remand centre, which will incorporate facilities for police and for court work, in Russell Street. It will not be only a remand centre. Regarding the time scal'e, planning has already commenced and tenders-I believe I am correct in this-will be called before the end of the next financial year.

UNEMPLOYMENT AT HORSHAM.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH (Doutta Galla Province): With apologies to the representatives of the NorthWestern Province, in which I once lived, and in which I have an interest, I should like to ask the Minister for State Development and Decentralization a question concerning unemployment at Horsham. I listened with interest to the Minister's remarks concerning grants for Horsham. Is the Minister aware that there are 1,000 people un'employed within the region of the City of Horsham?

Questions without Notice. [12 MAY, 1976.] Sessional Orders. 817

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister for State Development and Decentralization) : Yes, I am aware of the current unemployment situation in the City of Horsham.

EUROPEAN CARP IN CHERRY LAKE, ALTONA.

The Hon. A. W. KNIGHT (Melbourne W est Province): I ask the Minister representing the Minister for Conservation whether he is able to inform the House of the European carp situation in Cherry Lake, Altona, and the recent announcement made by officers of the Fisheries and Wildlife Division that there is a small number of carp in the lake.

The Hon. A. J. HUNT (Minister for Local Government): Naturally, I am not aware of the precise position of European carp in Cherry Lake. I do not know whether it has reached infestation level, but I will certainly discuss the matter with the Minister for Conservation and ask him to contact the honorable member.

UNEMPLOYMENT AT HORSHAM.

The Hon. K. I. WRIGHT (NorthW'estern Province): In view of the reply of the Minister for State Development and Decentralization to the question regarding the unemployment in the Horsham 'area of 1,000 peopl'e, what does the Minister's department propose to do to rectify the situation?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister for State Development and Decentralization): As the honorable member would be well aware, the unemployment situation in Horsham, or anywhere else, regrettably, is not the prime Ministerial responsibility of my department. However, the initiatives which have been generated by the department under the direction of my esteemed predecessor in this office will be continued and, hopefully, bef.ore long there will be new initiatives which will obviously have a bearing on the future unemployment situation.

SEAT BELT LEGISLATION.

The Hon. H. R. WARD (SouthEastern Province): Is the Chief Secretary aware that many charity organizations are concerned about the current seat belt legislation and whether amendments need to be made to the legislation to enable children or disabled people to be carried in the front or rear seats of vehicles with a harness other than those already stipulated by legislation?

The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary): I am aware of this problem, which was foreseen when the legislation was enacted. I am also aware of the concern of the organizations to which the honorable member referred and the matter is under consideration at the moment.

MENTAL HEALTH (AMENDMENT) BILL.

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health), by leave, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Mental Health Act 1959.


a first time.

SESSIONAL ORDERS.

The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary): By leave, I move-

That so much of the Sessional Orders as provides that the hour of meeting on Tuesdays shall be half-past four o'clock, on Wednesdays four o'clock, and on Thursdays eleven o'clock; that on Wednesday in each week private members' business shall take precedence of Government business; and that no new business be taken after halfpast ten o'clock, be suspended until the end of June next and that until the end of June next the hour of meeting on Tuesdays shall be half-past three o'clock, on Wednesdays a quarter-past two o'clock and on Thursdays a quarter to eleven o'clock; and that Government business shall take precedence of all other business.

I need hardly say that naturally private members' business will take its full time on each Wednesday, but after the House rises this week only a fortnight will remain before the end of the sessional period. The extra

818 Electoral Commission LCOUNCIL.] Bill.

time involved in suspension of the Sessional Orders is equivalent to another sitting day.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALL Y (Melbourne North Province): I thank the Leader of the House for what he has said. The practice has worked well over the past quarter of a century, and I see no reason why the Labor Party should change it now.


WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (AMENDMENT) BILL.

The Hon. A. J. HUNT (Minister for Local Government), by leave, moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Weights and Measures Act 1958 and for other purposes.

The motion was agreed to. The Bill was brought in and read a

first time.

ELECTORAL COMMISSION BILL.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY (Melbourne North Provin.ce): I move-

That this Bill be now read a second time. This Bill deals with a subject which is of current concern to legislators in many parts of the world. It is a matter on which the High Court of Australia recently had occasion to pass judgment in The Attorne~-General for Australia (ex. reI. McKtnlay) v. the Commonwealth, a judgment which runs into nearly 100 pages. This Bill concerns the manner in which electoral boundaries should be drawn and the basis of the distribution. It contains proposals for the reform of the existing law in Victoria. The proposals are very moderate ones. They do not go to the lengths attemp!ed in other jurisdictions, for example In the United States of America, because I am endeavouring in this Bill to avoid controversy and to gain general acceptance for what I believe to be a most important measure.

The Bill goes no further than to guarantee the fulfilment of certain basic requirements to the system which Mr. Justice Stephen called representative democracy in McKin-

lay's case. I believe that these principles are generally acceptable to everyone and can be fulfilled best in the manner provided for in this Bill.

The Hon. S. R. McDoNALD: It might be a good idea to send a copy to your colleagues in New South Wales.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY: I am sure they will not need any pro~ding from me, just as South AustralIa did not need any prodding from me. This Bill was first introduced in 1973 and it received but scant consideration from the Government, for reasons that I shall advance shortly.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett): Now we will return to Victoria.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY: Not altogether, Mr. President. I was going to recall the Reform Act. in 1832 in Britain. That marked a mIlestone in the history of representative democracy, although the franchise was far more limited then than now.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: We are going to hear about the rotten boroughs all over again.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY: Not very much, but I could not sit down without acknowledging the great advance they have made to the cause of conservatism, and the denial of democracy in Victoria. The enfranchisement of women was another stage, yet a form of representative government was in existence before that reform was implemented-so we are inching our way. A jurisdictio~ in which women were not enfranchIsed would be regarded now as lacking representative democracy, and I am sure would lead to protest from the ladies. I t becomes necessary for those advances to determine how the requirements of representative democracy may be fulfilled satisfactorily in 1976. This is not an easy question to answer. Answers are likely to vary. For example, in the United States of America it has been decided that electoral boundaries must be drawn so that they are" as

Electoral Commission [12 MAY, 1976.] Bill. 819

nearly as practicable" equal. Tha t was decided in Wesberry v. Sanders (1964) 376 U.S. Report at page 1. This has been interpreted to require variations of less than 3 per cent between electorates, as decided in Kirkpatrick v. Preisler (1968) 394 U.S. 526. At times 10 per cent was allowed, but it was 3 per cent in the United States of America.

In these cases in the United States of America, to some of which I shall make a fleeting reference, the Supreme Court was concentrating on the second factor of representative democracy, of which I have spoken earlier, the nature of the electoral system. It decided against a system which enabled "vote diluting discrimination to be accomplished through the device of districts containing widely varied numbers of inhabitants ". How often have honorable members heard that?

In Australia, fewer requirements have been held to be satisfactory. As I have indicated, in the leading authority, the McKinlay case, decided a little while ago, the High Court approved of a variation of up to 10 per cent.

This Bill has three main features. It provides for the establishment of an electoral commission, constituted in clause 3 (2), by a judge of the County Court, the Chief Electoral Officer and the Surveyor-General. The function of the commission is to divide the State of Victoria into electoral districts. Under this Bill, this function will be the responsibility of the commission entirely. It is set out in clauses 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14. Once a redivision of electoral districts has been determined by the commission, it passes inexorably into law; and not before this time, so that Parliament cannot do anything about it.

If this Bill is accepted, Victoria will hardly be unique in its possession of an electoral commission. A similar scheme exists in Britain and, closer to home, in South Australia, the famous gerrymander has at last been broken.

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHToN: Perhaps reversed.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY: No, and there will be no reversal under this Bill either. It has been broken. There was a recent article in the Australian Financial Review which suggested that the requirements laid down by the High Court in the McKinlay case -let every politican State or Federal know it-might be satisfied best by the establishment of a Commonwealth electoral commission. I do not desire that, but it is an interesting article. It would have accomplished, I presume, much the same as this Bill, but we ought to be able to do things for ourselves. We have certainly had plenty of experience with rotten boroughs and the like, as was pointed out by a Minister tonight.

There are several reasons why this function should be transferred to an independent commission. First, the activity of drawing and redrawing electoral boundaries is a highly complex one, particularly if a variety of factors are to be taken into account. All honorable members acknowledge that, or ought to. This was recognized by Sir Garfield Barwick in McKinlay's case. He said-

It is probably impossible to derive a formula for electoral distribution which will necessarily produce equality in voting value. I do not think anyone would disagree with the arithmetic of that judgment. If this is so, and who would disagree with the Chief Justice, surely it is best to entrust such a function to an experienced body to conform to criteria decided by this Parliament from time to time. A Parliament or a Government is not the best agent to perform a redistribution, in terms of either expertise or available time.

Furthermore, a commission will be able to carry out a redistribution free from what are often informal criteria in such matters, such as concern over the political implications of new boundaries. Every member of Parliament shudders at even the thought

820 Electoral Commission [COUNCIL.] Bill.

of it. An already complex procedure should not be further complicated or given to members of Parliament by this consideration.

The Hon. S. E. GLEESON: Should such a redistribution take account of the non-voters in the electorate?

The Hon. J. W. GALBALL Y: Not in my judgment. It is the vote of elected people. I have heard that canvassed from time to time. It is no good at all because in one electorate there might a large population with no children, and in another electorate a young population with a plethora of children.

The Hon. S. E. GLEESON: Would you not say the parents of a large family had more weight as voters?

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY: I hope so. I was one of a family of nine and I am all for the family getting some consideration.

It would pay Mr. Gleeson to do a little research. That has been canva.ssed somewhat spuriously for years.

This leads me to my second reason why a commission should be entrusted with the task of drawing electoral boundaries. Of all tasks, this is the one least able to be performed by Parliament because it effects so directly perpetuation of the Government in government and the Opposition in opposition. The temptation to gerrymander on either a large or small scale must always be present while electoral distribution remains solely within the competence of the Government or Parliament. No State has had a worse Parliamentary record in this than has Victoria.

The Hon. H. M. HAMILTON: That is debatable.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY: I am prepared to debate that at any time but now.

The second feature of the Bill to which I wish to draw attention is the frequency with which the commis-

sion is required to meet. Clause 7 provides that the commission will meet-as often as it considers necessary for carrying out its functions under this Act, but in any event, not more than two years after a general election for the Assembly.

This will ensure that the proposed equality between boundaries remains constant. It is broadly in accord with the decision of the High Court in the McKinlay case with respect to the division of the Commonwealth electoral boundaries. I refer honorable members to section 24 of the Commonwealth Constitution.

The logic of this provision is indisputable. Once we are agreed on a fair and equitable basis for the distribution of electorates, we must surely be agreed on the principle that that basis should be maintained, and not allowed to erode through inattention.

The third feature of the Bill is the basis of distribution itself. Under clause 8 (1) the commission is to have regard to four considerationsphysical features of terrain; means of travel, traffic arteries and communications; community or diversity of interests; and the likelihood of changes in the number of electors in the various localities.

But in any event under clause 8 (2) the boundaries between districts must not vary by more than 10 per cent from the average. This is a moderate proposal. Honorable members will be aware that I am in general sympathy with the point of view expressed by the United States Supreme Court when it said-

Legislators represent people, not trees or acres. Legislators are elected by voters, not farms or cities or economic interests. As long as ours is a representative form of Government, and our legislators are those instruments of Government elected directly by and directly representative of the people, the right to elect legislators in a free and unimpaired fashion is a bedrock of our political system.

That was said a long time ago, perhaps twenty years ago in the case of Reynolds v. Sims.

Vagrancy (Amendment) [12 MAY, 1976.] Bill. 821

But this Bill does not give full effect to that point of view. It will still be possible for legislators to represent trees, although admittedly the number of trees may be more limited. Factors such as the physical features of an electorate will still be taken into account. The only differences are that they will be taken into account at regular intervals and subject to an overriding proviso against variations from the normal greater than 10 per cent. This is exactly the same variation that takes place under section 19 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act. The Bill is not radical. It is not even innovatory. It may send a chill down the spine of some honorable members because, as I have pointed out before t no member of Parliament is any good unless he has a seat.

Victoria has groped its way through a thicket of rotten boroughs and gerrymandered electorates for more than 100 years. In the estimation of the people of Victoria, sadly I reflect that the Parliament of Victoria is a lame duck, a target for cynics and those who wish to destroy Parliamentary government.

On the motion of the Hon. HADDON STOREY (Attorney-General) , the debate was adjourned.

It was ordered that the debate be adjourned until Wednesday, May 19.

VAGRANCY (AMENDMENT) BILL.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY (Melbourne North Province): I m'Ove--

That this Bill be now read a second time. With the approach of winter once again the plight of Melbourne's homeless men is with us. Some, but by no means all, are given shelter and care by voluntary organizations and their kindly helping staff but there is not sufficient room for them all. What of the others? Having no money they run the ever present risk of being sent to gaol under section 5 of the Vagrancy Act. The Vagrancy Act enables this social problem to be overcome by putting the people out of sight in gaol. So long as being penni-

less is a crime, the concept of justice in favouring the rich and punishing the poor must be conceded and acknowledged.

Poverty is a social and not a legal problem. IMost but not all of those charged with vagrancy are alcoholics. Worst of all, most of them are young men, still in their teens, unfit, frightened and without hope. The incidence of alcoholism among jobless and homeless men is, sadly, very high. Once again I took some time to obtain from my friends at the Salvation Army s'Ome figures on this. The figures are alarming. I was informed that if a vagrant is put in gaol for a month or twelve months he is without alcohol in gaol but the first thing he does upon leaving the ga'Ol is to become hopelessly drunk. Mr. Knight tells me these people do this on the cheapest of spirits, although I do not know how Mr. Knight would know more about it.

It is a terribly sad reflection on a rich country like Australia that so m'any young men are growing up hopeless alcoholics and are unable to work or fend for themselves. One of the most startling features of it is that many of these young men have the most bitter hatred for their families. The people who run Ozanam House, the Gill Counselling Hostel for Homeless Men and other places are marvellous citizens. They have immense problems because same of the poor fellows to whom they give shelterthere are many semi-permanentstry by all kinds of ruses to bring alcohol onto the premises and to prevent it from being discovered. When drink is available others want it and fights break out which causes problems t'O which nobody 'Outside the voluntary organizations has given much thought. On several occasions I have visited such places and each time I am warmly appreciative of the work carried out by the people there.

The old vagrant has disappearedthere are a few-and it is mainly a crime of the young. It is being tackled

822 Vagrancy (Amendment) [COUNCIL.] Bill.

in the wrong way. These people are being put in gaol and that solves nothing except perhaps to take them off the street temporarily. It seems to me, and this is a matter for the Government, that some resort might be made to the care and protection provisions under the Children's Court Act. Why could not we extend that to cover adults in need of care and protection. These men are in need of care and protection. One cannot leave a drunk lying in the gutter. With some innovations of that nature, some thought might be given to handling the problem of the vagrant other than by sending him to gaol. Gaol is a great stigma even to these poor unfortunates. They become increasingly resentful because they have committed no crime and yet they are in gaol-gaolbirds.

As the report of the Statute Law Revision Committee pointed out, the vagrancy law is used implroperly. It is used to deprive a man of his liberty, Micawber-like, until something turns up. Years ago this used to be called a holding charge. A man suspected of murder, of which there was insufficient evidence, was charged with vagrancy. That happened in the case of a man called Sodeman. He was charged with vagrancy and brought down from Mildura where inquiries were made. He was ultimately convicted and hanged. That is an illustration of how the section is used.

Far more serious is the fact that the Vagrancy Act is selective. It has never been used against the rich; Section 5 of the Vagrancy Act states, inter alia-

(1) Where any member of the Police Force has reasonable cause to believe---

It states" cause to believe" not to prove. It goes only to a matter of belief-that any person has no lawful means of support or has insufficient lawful means of support he may arrest such person either with or without warrant and bring him before a court of petty sessions or justices, or may summon him to lappear before a court of petty sessions.

The Hon. J. W. Galballl'.

(2) Every person who fails to prove to the satisfaction of the court--The onus shifts to the person, not the prosecutor. He has only to say that he has reasonable cause to believe that so-and-so has no lawful means of support. The onus then shifts to the defendant. Years ago I used to deal with hundreds of these cases. The constable gives evidence almost as though he is taking the oath. He says, "I saw this man in Victoria Park and I suspected he had no lawful means of support". Then the magistrate says, "Mr. Galbally, are you going to call evidence", and so on. The section continues-

Every person who fails to prove to the satisfaction of the court or justices, that he has sufficient means of support or that such means of support as he has are lawful shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than twelve months.

The provisions of the Vagrancy Act have never been used against the corporate pickpocket, the failed but wellto-do company promoter and the white-collar worker.

The Hon. H. M. HAMILTON: That would include union executives.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALL Y: I do not acknowledge that interjection, I reject it. The activities of these men are a public scandal. They are seen to be living in luxury, flaunting their wealth before the very eyes of their victims. As a matter of public notoriety, their means of support are not lawful. To implement this section requires nothing more than an observation by a member of the Police Force that they have reasonable cause to believe that such person has no lawful means of support. In some of the dreadful company crashes years ago, the shareholders were told that there was not a penny for them, and the directors were seen to be scurrying around the coast in luxurious yachts, aeroplanes, and so on, and living happily ever after in other places of the world.

The Hon. H. M. HAMILTON: Is there any difference between that and the union that ties up the whole nation's economy?

Vagrancy (Amendment) [12 MAY, 1976.] Bill. 823

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY: I am referring to the Vagrancy Act.

The Hon. H. M. HAMILTON: The honorable member was applying it to company directors. What about union executives?

The Hon. J. W. GAL BALL Y: Australia's public companies have a wonderful record. Men of great initiative and courage have been involved in great Australian companies which have prospered, often in the face of fierce competition and threats to run them out of town. Broken Hill Proprietary Co. Ltd. first began steelmaking 75 years ago. That was a courageous decision for Australia. Ben Chifley set up Australia's own car industry.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: What about when he sent the troops down the mine?

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett): Order! I invite the honorable member to return to the Bill.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY: He was acting in the interests of Australia, as he thought.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: I am sure he was.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY: He was a great Australian, one of the finest we have ever produced. He was a man of great imagination, a humble engine-driver, but he saw the greatness of this country. He was not afraid to put his job on the line, because that is what it cost him in the election a few months later in 1949 when this country was paralyzed by the coal strike and there was no power.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: It was a courageous and correct decision.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett): Order! I ask the honorable member to return to the Bill.

The Hon. J. W. GALBALLY: There is not much courage on the part of the Government when it fails to enforce the provisions of the Vagrancy Act which apply to the rich as well as the poor. The stem penalties of

the Act are used only against impoverished people and I want to see it abolished.

On the motion of the Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary) , the debate was adjourned.


PLIGHT OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES.

The debate (adjourned from May 5) was resumed on the motion of the Hon. S. R. McDonald (Northern Province)-

That this House of Parliament, acutely aware of the grave plight of all persons involved in primary industrial pursuits due to severe drought conditions and economic factors beyond their control, calls upon the Government of Victoria to initiate and to seek the immediate co-operation of the Commonwealth Government in a comprehensive plan to provide urgently-needed relief and assistance.

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER (Minister of Water Supply): I believe every member of this House, especially those who have already spoken, agrees with the debate and what it seeks to achieve. One does not have to be a farmer to realize the gravity of the situation of primary industry in this State, especially dairying, beef production, and perhaps canned fruits and dried fruits can be included, and after listening to Mr. Bradbury yesterday, apiarists might also be included.

The low return that the dairy farmer and the beef producer have been receiving during the past two years should concern everyone. If it does not, it should, because the dairy farmers are in a real predicament, particularly those who are supplying the manufacturing factories. I am well aware from discussions with people in the dairying industry in the northern part of Victoria, especially Rochester, Lockington and through that area, that tile cost of production has risen enormously. This is something over which the dairy farmer or the primary producer has no control.

824 Plight oJ [COUNCIL.] Primary Industries.

When I refer to the dairy fanner, I include the beef producer, because I believe they go hand in glove. In past years the dairy fanner has sold off a lot of his young stock for beef production and also his old cows which are no longer producing milk products. In the past the returns from this stock have been excellent. Yesterday the Sun News-Pictorial contained the heading, " Cheaper to Shoot". I shall refer to that later.

It has been said by my colleague, the Minister of Health, that the farmer is a price taker and not a price maker. We will have to have a good look at this statement. If we are to get the farmer to an economic situation, some other form of marketing will have to be considered. This has been emphasized in the debate by the Minister of Health, Mr. McDonald, and other speakers.

An interesting paper by Mr. Bill Carberry was sent around by the Victorian Fanners Union and it contained the classification of red meat. A scheme that greatly interested me was one produced by Professor Yates from the Armidale University. Mr. Gleeson, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Elliot and I went to Armidale some years ago and interviewed Professor Yates. I thought his scheme was excellent and I am pleased that the Victorian Fanners Union has adopted and recommended it to honorable members for consideration, perhaps with some modification.

As honorable members are aware, a large percentage of our rural products is exported. It is interesting to note from inquiries made from the Department of Agriculture that 24 per cent of this country's primary products are produced in Victoria. The breakdown is that Victoria produces 24 per cent of the meat, 20 per cent of the wool, 51 per cent of dairy products. A breakdown of the dairy products is 80 per cent butter, 45 per cent cheese, 57 per cent processed milk products and 25 per cent milk for human consumption. When one considers the amount that is pro-

The Hon. F. J. Granter.

duced in the State, it can be realized that any recession in the industry causes many problems. We could say that we have had this situation in the past years, but it has developed much further this year. We have had the driest period Victoria has suffered over the past 23 years. Farmers faced similar circumstances of drought in 1967-68 and in 1972-73. Virtually, they have had only one good seas'On in the past five. In some other seas'Ons many dairy farmers and beef producers suffered from floods which caused production to drop.

We all realize that there is a great deal of 'Overstocking in this State as the result of producers endeavouring to increase their income. Whilst cattle and sheep were selling at good prices, that paid off. Now, with the downfall in prices and the poor season, producers are facing trouble. The Government has taken a number 'Of steps to assist producers. The Minister of Health detailed some of them but I should like to reiterate a few. In 1975 the Government provided $2 million for beef producers in the form of loans at 4 per cent interest and subsidies on both road and rail transport of stock to market.

The Victorian Government invited the Federal Government to assist in the brucellosis eradication campaign. It is expected that by the end of June 15,000 react'Ors will have been slaughtered at a cost of $400,000 to the State Government but, to date, the CommDnwealth has not put in one cent.

In another place yesterday the Minister of Agriculture made a Ministerial statement in which he detailed the measures the Government has taken to assist primary industry. They are considerable. I could read them tD the House but I am sure that honorable members interested in the plight of primary industry-all honorable members would be interestedcan read the statement.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: Could you please read them so that they will be on the record.

Plight of [12 MAY, 1976.] Primary Industries. 825

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER: In response to Mr. Clarke's request, I shall read part of the Ministerial statement made by the 'Minister of Agriculture yesterday-

WHEAT-In 1974 it was the Victorian Government which peI'!suaded the Federal Labor Government to put money at risk in the five-year wheat stabilization scheme. The Victorian Government also fought to have the owner-operator's allowance included in the domestic price for wheat.

ApPLES AND PEARs-Victoria and the Commonwealth have paid subsidies of $68,000 for fruit exported at risk in 1974-75. Similar schemes are scheduled for 1975-76.

CANNING FRUIT-This year the State Government provided a loan of $3 million with low interest to canneries to enable growers to be paid for last season's fruit which is repayable over three years.

VEGETABLEs-The State Government intro~uced legislation to help stabilize the tomato mdustry. The Tomato Processing Industry Bill to be enacted gives a stable contracting mechanism. I have also initiated talks with potato growers which could lead to similar legislation.

WINE GRAPES-I initiated discussions between New South Wales, Victoria, and South A~stmIia to discuss pricing and this I hope wIll lead to greater stability within this industry.

PoULTRy-Broiler legisl'ation has been introduced to give producers stability of contracts and price. Egg production control legislation is in operation.

This is an area which interests me. lt will also interest my colleague, Mr. Grimwade, Mr. Clarke and other honorable members who know of the difficulties suffered by poultry pro?ucers, and especially those engaged In egg production. Some time ago they were in serious trouble but I was told only last Saturday, by one of the leading poultry farmers in Bendigo, that the industry is now working well. The Ministerial statement continued-

Hops-Hop growers are experiencing over production problems, and recently I initiated meetings between Victoria and Tasmania and an approach has been made to the Federal Minister for Primary Industry for assistance.

BEEF-In October, 1974, I called a meeting of representatives of the meat industry to discuss the problems of the industry.

At the Australian Agricultural Council meeting in February, 1975, Victoria requested a step up in the eradication of bru-

cellosis and tuberculosis and asked the Federal Government to supply funds for this purpose.

In May, 1975, the Industries Assistance Commission recommended that the Federal Government pay 75 per cent towards compensating farmers for the slaughter of brucella reaotors with the States paying 25 per cent.

In November, 1975, tired of waiting for Federal funds, the Victorian Government started the test-and-slaughter stage of the eradication of brucellosis. We were the only State to do so.

By the end of June this year, it is anticipated that the Victorian compensation fund will be $400,000 in deficit and 15,000 reactors will have been slaughtered, and still we have not received any funds from Canberra nor has the Federal Government even made a decision.

. During 1975, the State Government gave aI~ . to beef producers in the form of $2 mIllIon at 4 per cent in loans and subsidies on both road and rail transport of cattle to market. It was only after this offer that the Federal Government was spurred into offering assistance to beef producers.

At the February, 1976, meeting of the Australian AgricuUural Council I persuaded the other States to agree to introduce a classification scheme for meat from 1st January next year. The Australian Meat Board has been asked to report to the August Australian Agricultural Council meeting on how such a scheme can operate. A seminar was held in Adelaide last week to allow the industry to examine the board's plan for classification. It met with widespread acceptance.

DAIRYING-In 1974, the Victorian Government established the Board of Inquiry into the Dairy Industry to look at all aspects of the dairy industry. Also in 1974, I appointed an independent chairman to work towards unity of our two dairy farmer organizations and this unity has been achieved.

Because of political decisions in the European Economic Community, a mountain of skim milk powder has accumulated. The problems of low returns which now face dairy farmers became apparent about July last year. At the August meeting of the Australian Agricultural Council last year, the Federal Government refused to discuss the dairy industry until the Industries Assistance Commission had finished its report.

In October, I wrote to the then Minister for Agriculture, Dr. Patterson, pointing out that the sHuation in the dairy industry had deteriorated. At the February Agricultural Council, I asked the Federal Government to underwrite skim milk powder and casein. The Federal Minister wanted more time to look at various industry plans and it was not until 26th March, seven weeks later,

826 Plight of [COUNCIL.] Primary Industries.

that the Commonwealth offered to underwrite skim milk powder to $250 a tonne on a $1 for $1 basis with the States.

Perhaps I should point out that the National Party of Victoria wanted the Government to accept this offer immediately.

Two Vi~torian Ministers, the Minister for ConservatIon, Mr. Borthwick and I attended the special Agricultural Council: We argued . ~gainst !he principle of States underwntmg, as did all State Ministers and point~d out that $250 would not put ~oney In dairy farmers' pockets. The danger in a State Government underwriting an export is that it sets a dangerous precedent. What will .h.ap~en when the new five-year wheat stabllizatIon scheme comes up for review? Will the States be asked for a share? wili the States have to take part in the wool floor price?

If the future of rural aid is to rely on S~ates contributing, then the amount of aid wlll always be dependent on how much the poorest or least involved State can afford. As a result of our arguments, the Federal Government later offered to underwrite to $300 a tonne on a $2 for $1 basis.

Since the Victorian Government agreed to join the underwriting scheme for skim milk powder, the Federal Government has changed the rules twice. The last change wa.s .sent to the Premier by telex last week. OrigInally we were told that the total cost of underwriting skim milk powder at $300 a tonne would be $15 million <and Victoria's share would be 78· 2 per cent of one-third of that amount-$3' 9 million. Then we were told it would apply only to skim milk p.owder which was sold through the equalizatIOn scheme. This lifted Victoria's share to 82 per cent and let Queensland out without having to pay one cent.

The Premier then calculated -that this would cost Victoria up to $4 million so he set that as the limit. However, last week the Premier received a telex from the Prime Minister saying that the total cost of the scheme would be $68 million, which will make Victoria's share about $18 million. Naturally Victoria had to check this calculation. The telex was drafted by the Minister for Primary Industry.

The Victorian Government has agreed to underwrite skim milk powder. We have also agreed to take part in reconstruction and carry-on finance. However, we are still waiting for final details from Canberra, and have been since the Premier sent a telex to the Prime Minister on 14th April stating our agreement.

Another meeting of the Agricultural CouI?-cil will be held this Friday, 14th May, to diSCUSS production cut-backs. This Government is against any production cut-backs unless the cut-backs are on a national basis and are based on th-e high cost producers being the first out of the industry.


The Bureau of Agricultural Economics survey, conducted from 1971-72 to 1973-74, showed that the average cost of producing a litre of milk on all farms in Victoria was 3·3 cents; in New South Wales it was 5·5 cents; in Queensland 5·8 cents' and in Western Australia it was 6'3 cents.

On the other hand, if we average returns from milk and milk products in each State, we find that New South Wales farmers, on average, receive equivalent to $1.35 a pound butter-fat; Western Austr:alia 96 cents; Queensland 90 cents and Victoria only 69 cents. Victoria is the most efficient cost producer.

Equalization first came into being as a method of evening out returns to producers. The present equalization no longer does this and, in fact, has led to even greater differences between farmers. This is not to say that the principle of equalization is wrong-it is just that the present system of equalization is not good enough for today.

When we look at the wheat industry, we find that the total home market returns are pooled with the total export market returns and farmers are paid ,an equal equalized return. However, in the dairy industry, we do not equalize the returns of the best market-the liquid milk market. Also there are so many factories, and even States that do not take part in the equalization of one or more products, and there are separate equalization pools for different products.

An example of this is the fact that Queensland does not participate in skim milk powder equalization. Queensland claims it can sell all the skim milk powder it produces on the local market at around $450 to $500 a tonne and therefore should not have to contribute towards the present underwriting of skim milk powder. What Queensland fails to realize is that, if equalization did not exist, Victoria could and would sell its skim milk powder into Queensland for a lot less and it could well be that Queensland would have to export its product. Until all milk and products frof!1 all States are equalized, then equalIzation cannot balance returns to farmers. How can we remove the parochial interest of each State and develop a national industry?

As I see it, State Governments and industry can either sit down and negotiate an orderly transfer of returns so that all Australian farmers receive an equal share of the market, or sit back ,and watch a disorderly transfer, which will make returns to all farmers crash. With an orderly tr~nsfer, w~ ~ill b~ able to keep a premium prIce for liqUid mIlk and an orderly price for other. products. With a. disorderly transfer, With farmers and factories fighting for a share of the high-priced home markets, prices are likely to crash to export parity.


In such a fight, only the low-cost producers would survive and, as I have already mentioned, Victoria's cost of production is lower than that in any other State, so its survival chances are naturally the highest. The Victorian Government would l'Iather see change by negotiation but, if this is not possible, we will be forced to take action to prevent our own farmers from cutting each other's throats.

UNEMPLOYMENT-The Victorian Government has also taken the initiative in trying to obtain unemployment benefits and household support for farmers. On 14th April, I sent a telex to Senator Guilfoyle seeking clarification of the conditions for unemployment benefits. The Premier telexed the Prime Minister pointing out the differences between regional officers of social security when assessing farmers for unemployment. I followed this up by talking to both Senator Guilfoyle and Mr. Sinclair. The Victorian Government should not have had to do this; it should have been organized by the Federal Minister for Primary Industry, Mr. Sinclair, in consultation with Senator Guilfoyle and the Federal Cabinet. After my discussions with both Federal Ministers, a Federal Cabinet sub-committee was formed and just this morning Mr. Sinclair announced that farmers would be eligible for unemployment benefits.

However, the aid announced this morning will cover only farmers who are actively seeking work. The Victorian Government has also asked for household supportwhich was previously recommended by the Industries Assistance Commission. Household support is needed for those farmers who cannot, for various reasons, make themselves available for full-time work, and who are not eligible for carry-on loans from the Rural Finance and Settlement Commission.

The cash operating surplus to Victorian dairy farmers in the seasons 1971-72, 1972-73 and 1973-74 averaged out at $12,700 a year and for this season it is $2,000. The Henderson report highlighted rural poverty even during the years of reasonable returns. It is much worse today. During this period, interest payments have almost doubled and prices have soared. When this is coupled with increased prices and interest rates, which have almost doubled, it is obvious that many farmers cannot meet their financial commitments and have no money to live on.

It is therefore imperative that farmers with very low or negative returns are given financial assistance. This assistance should be given in three ways-

Unemployment benefits for those who can offer themselves for full-time work;

Household support for those who do not qualify for unemployment benefits or carry-on finance; and

Carry-on loans for those who will be viable in the long term.

Through the urging of this Government, we have now obtained unemployment benefits, carry-on loans are already available for beef producers and will shortly be available for dairy farmers and we will continue to press the Federal Government for household support.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett): Order! Mr. Clarke, who asked for this statement to be read, does not appear to be paying attention to what the Minister is saying. Does the honorable member wish the remainder of the statement to be read?

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE (Northern Province): In answer to your question Mr. President, I did not think the statement would be so lengthy and I thought the Minister of Water Supply would have summarized some of the passages, particularly the one which is really an explanation rather than a description of the initiatives about which I asked.

The PRESIDENT: Can the Minister state whether there is much more of the statement?

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER (Minister of Water Supply): There is a fair bit more, Mr. President.

The PRESIDENT: Mr. Clarke has not answered my question. Does he desire the Minister of Water Supply to read the remainder of the statement?

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: The House has probably had enough, Mr. President.

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER: I thank Mr. Clarke, and you also, Mr. President, for your assistance. I have detailed most of the initiatives undertaken by the Government. However, I would like to state on my own behalf what I have endeavoured to initiate through my departments-I assure the House this will not be lengthy. In view of the current situation I am sure every Minister would wish to assist wherever possible and though the efforts of my two departments may be meagre, I can assure the House that they have been sincere.


As honorable members will know, there has been a record allocation of water this year for irrigation purposes. On 1st August, 1975, I agreed to advance the date for the commencement of the irrigation season, and as most honorable members know, from that date until almost December it continued to rain. A policy of maintaining a high level of efficiency within irrigation districts is absolutely necessary and of advantage to the irrigator.

Farm production in the Western District has suffered greatly, just as it has in parts of Gippsland and other parts of Victoria. I am referring mainly to the dairying and beef industries. At Euroa the other night, an irrigator came to me and stated that he was one of the happy irrigators as he had been able to present his stock to the market in a reasonable condition, and had therefore gained from this through the prices he had received.

The irrigators have requested the Government to be allowed to defer payment of their rates when they are in a serious financial position, and this request has been granted. It would be of interest to a number of honorable members to know that whilst it is necessary for those irrigators requesting deferment of rates to have approximately 75 per cent of their production involved with beef, that has not been a hard and fast rule and the Government has granted applications received from irrigators in a serious financial position who have had a lower percentage of their production concerned with beef.

All applications for deferment closed on 15th April, and 554 irrigators had applied from the Goulburn-Murray district, 3 from the Campaspe district, and 52 from the Macalister district, for deferment of payment of rates and those applications are now being processed.

I can state at this stage that the storages in this State are at a reasonable level. However, if we do not receive good winter and spring rains,


naturally they will not improve. However, I still believe in most districts there is an irrigation season ahead with the storages as they are.

I know it has already been mentioned, but as Minister of Water Supply I am in c~rge of the State Rivers and Water Supply Commission and the Government did increase the water rates this year by some 10 per cent. I considered, as I have stated in the House, that this was necessary to keep the irrigation districts in good working order. If charges had not been increased there would have to be a fairly large reduction in staff.

The Government subsidizes irrigation districts throughout the State to the extent of $754,000, and there was an injection of about $800,000 of money under the Regional Employment Development Scheme put into the district during the past financial year.

The Government, as all members know, is building the Dartmouth dam. The Mitchell River scheme will be commenced in 1978, and the Thomson River dam is currently under construction although only at an initial stage. Although it may be said that not all this water is allocated to country districts, or to Gippsland in particular, one-third of it is, as Mr. Bradbury knows.

The Hon. A. K. BRADBURY: Who is paying for it?

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER: The Government will pay for one-third but two-thirds will be met by the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works ratepayers.

Further, I requested the Forests Commission to advise me of what temporary employment could be made available to farmers who are in necessitous circumstances. I have been advised that the commission will employ 45 to 50 men in its planting scheme, for a period of three months. It will be said that this is only a drop in the bucket. I agree, but nevertheless it is something that will help during this period.


Likewise, the Water Commission could employ a number of men if finance were made available. It must be provided by the Commonwealth Government. In the past couple of days I have read in the newspapers that the dole has been made available to farmers. I do not like that word, and prefer the word "assistance". No farmer wishes to receive the dole. It is only because of the economic circumstance that he is unable to work his own property that such assistance must be made available.

As Mr. McDonald said, the Melbourne press has been forthright in its statements on the plight of the farmer. Only last night the Melbourne Herald contained a good article. Although we knew it had to be done, earlier this week we were all shocked that farmers had to shoot approximately 1,000 cattle in the Shire of Deakin. I hate to think that this action had to be taken but I realize that the non-producing stock, which is not likely to be of use in the circumstances, has to be withdrawn from the farms.

I was interested to read an article in the Melbourne Sun News-Pictorial of 5th May under the heading" Beef's Future Looks Better". This article was written by a Miss Heather Willman following a statement by Mr. J. A. Kelly, chairman of the livestock and meat industry sub-committee of the Graziers Association of Victoria. I only hope his prediction will be fulfilled. Many similar statements have been made recently but there does not appear to be any evidence of improvement at present. Most farmers are optimists and hope conditions will improve.

I have always been keen to promote the farm forestry scheme. All farmers who are in a rainful area of at least 23 inches should consider it. The Government has announced that it will increase the limit to $200 per hectare and the maximum loan from $5,000 to $8,000. It may be said that this is a long-term project or investment because it takes ten years before the farmer gets any income.

However, the loan is interest free until the scheme becomes productive after ten years. It is an incentive for farmers, especially those who have young sons who wish to take on farming.

If farm economics continue to decline and the drought continues the Government will take the necessary action to provide support, with the assistance of the Commonwealth Government, for Victorian farmers. Any responsible Government would take this action. I can speak on behalf of my Cabinet colleagues because this is an item that is discussed by Cabinet each week as we realize the seriousness of the situation.

I have endeavoured to inform honorable members that because the Victorian Government is concerned it has taken a number of actions which it believes are necessary 'and it will continue to do so. Although I commend Mr. McDonald for bringing this motion forward, I move, as an amendment-

That the words Cl calls upon the Government of Victoria to initiate and to seek" be omitted with the view of inserting in place thereof the words, "supports the initiatives of the Government of Victoria seeking ".

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett): Order! Honorable members may now speak to the motion and the amendment.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE (Northern Province): This debate has been initiated by the National Party in an attempt to bring to the notice of this Parliament and the public of Victoria the severity of the rural crisis that is facing the State at present. For some years now the rural community has been faced with riSing costs and low returns for its products. In some cases this has been dealt with, as with wheat and to a certain extent with wool, by a support price and by linking the cost of production, of wheat for example, with the price being received.

At present, particularly with dairy products and with red meat, there is virtually no support. There is a little


now with skim milk powder but the costs have become astronomical. All honorable members will agree with that statement. Returns to the farmer have continued to slide downwards. This has been part of a policy, which I believe has been initiated to a certain extent by the Federal Government, of providing cheap food for the working people, the average consumer of Australia. The working man in Australia has benefited from wage indexation and has been able to keep up. I appreciate that there are unemployed and I sympathize with them. The working man has been able to keep up, on the whole, with the rapidly rising cost of living, but the farmer has not been able to keep up with the rising cost of living and the cost of production. When the full impact of the present situation is felt, there must be a reduction in the supply of food in Victoria and in Australia. We must have a situation where a man can work an economic dairy farm, without working his guts out, and get a fair return.

What actually happened was that, as costs rose the dairy farmer who was milking 90 cows and getting a reasonable return had to increase his herd to 130 cows to get the same return. He has gone now to 150 or 180 dairy cows. Probably just a man and his wife and family are working the farm and he now finds that he is getting no return. It just does not pay a man to increase his production and his efficiency. It does not pay him to increase his efficiency because the people on the land who are in the most trouble are to a large extent the most efficient. They went into debt to install herringbone milking sheds, electric fences and new sheds and bought new and more efficient machinery. The man on the land who is in debt is now in the most trouble. To a large extent, the most efficient farmers are in the most difficulty because they are in the most debt.

Farmers have been told to breed up the quality of their herds. Many farmers have tried to do so. In my

The Hon. M. A. ClaThe.

district the quality of cattle has been improved and J know that in the Western District there has been an outstanding l¥provement in cattle herds. The inister for State Development an Decentralization will appreciate ~at in Hamilton about ten days a 0, 2,700 cattle were offered for ale. Although many of them were in good condition, the average price was $15. That is the reward that the farmer gets for a1)tempting to breed up the quality of his cattle and market a product that the butcher is supposed to want. The result is a kick in the teeth in view of what farmers have been trying to do.

At present we have a Bill in this House to regulate tomato growing and to register tomato growers. That will have the direct effect of limiting the supply of tomatoes in this State. I foresee that similar action will need to be taken with other forms of production. I cannot see any alternative to licensing dairy farms and restricting the supply of milk.

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER: That was done with eggs.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: That is so. I think the Minister will agree that he had the full co-operation of the National Party in that regard. Action has also been taken on hen quotas and broilers, and the poultry industry has been regulated. The dairying industry will have to be regulated in the same way.

I appreciate that the Minister of Agriculture has taken some initiatives in respect of the beef industry or red meats. 'Members of the National Party are not saying that he has done nothing but we urge him to do more. That is the purpose of this debate.

I listened with interest to what the Minister of Water Supply has said about the initiatives of the Victorian Government. I have before me the policy of the Victorian Farmers Union with regard to red meat. It is written by W. J. Carberry, Chairman of the Pastoral Division of the Victorian Farmers Union and it is dated 29th


April, 1976. I shall read Cl number of the main policy outlines that the Victorian Farmers Union suggests and perhaps a speaker from the Government side might later indicate the Government's reaction to these policy initiatives.

The Victorian Farmers Union suggests the establishment of a Federal meat marketing authority by a restructuring of the Australian Meat Board; the introduction of a Federal classification scheme for red meats; and the establishment of a Victorian meat marketing authority to be responsible for certain functions until such time as the Federal authority is set up. The first of the functions for which the Victorian body would be responsible would be to set a standard of classification. I think the Minister of Water Supply remarked that that was desirable and I believe the Minister of Agriculture also supports that view and has taken some initiatives on it, but the need today is to speed up the standard of classification. The second function would be to assume ownership of the carcass while on the killing chain or during the dressing period. This is a vital machinery measure for these purposes. The other functions would be to ensure that carcasses are classified according to standards laid down and to set floor prices based on the average classification for al1 red meat produced.

There are other initiatives in the Victorian Farmers Union's policy, but the ones to which I have referred, in my 'Opinion, are the most important. If the Victorian Government could take up these suggestions from the Victorian Farmers Union-and I know the Graziers Association has also put proposals to the Government -with the Federal Government as a matter of urgency, something would be achieved by this debate.

It is unfortunate that for a long time the average member of the public has been gulled by the press and the news media into believing that the farmer is in receipt of special concessions and special handouts. The

superphosphate bounty has been the most twisted of all the s'O-called benefits the farming community has received. The cost of superphosphate is now approximately $70 a tonne and the subsidy amounts to some $11 a tonne, yet it is regarded as something paid into the farmer's pocket. This is untrue. The subsidy is, in fact, given to the m'anufacturer of superphosphate and the farmer is still paying very nearly $60 a tonne for superphosphate. Of course, he cannot afford to use it.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: He is paying a darn sight more by the time it is laid on his property because of freight costs, transport charges and so on.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: As ,Mr. Elliot's interjection empbas,izes, I am putting forward conservative figures, and the cost, particularly for the outback farmer, is far greater because of freight, transport and spreading costs.

The Hon. H. R. WARD: You cannot blame the press. That is the way it is put forward 'and the average person in the street takes the same view. It is up to the farmer to have better public relations.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: That is a pretty vital point. I saw a letter to the Age last week and the person who wrote it had apparently written 55 letters to the Age and this one was the first to be published.

It is a rather belated recognition of the rural plight, but the press is now paying attention to it and I am delighted with what is appearing in the Melbourne press. I am n'Ot quarrelling with what is appearing now because it is accurate and is drawing attention to the problems. However, I believe it is a shame that it has not happened before.

I intend, n'Onetheless, to take issue with today's Australian, because unlike the Melbourne newspapers, it seems to have been totally irresponsible in its treatment 'Of the matter. It is the issue of Wednesday, 12th May, and on the front page, under the headline "The crisis in the rural

832 Plight of [COUNCIL.) Primary Industries.

industry", there is an enormous headline ." Huge Handout For Farmers". The article states that 15,000 dairymen are expected to seek the dole. It refers to these impoverished farmers being assisted at an estimated cost of more than $500,000 a week. Although it makes reference to the fact that farmers have been crippled by the present situation, it states-

The Government would also spend $2 million until June to provide carry-on loans for dairy farmers thought to have a longterm chance of recovery.

I 'admit that it is only $2 million, but at least that is better than nothing. The problem is in the way in which it is put, as though the Government is spending this money. Actually, the money is to be made available as loans which are repayable in the same way as the deferral of water rates and charges, to which the Minister referred earlier, and, of course, that does not mean they are forgiven in any way. The day will come when they have to be paid. This is the type of article which has been appearing in the press and the type of propaganda which has been given to townspeople for a long time. The· result is that the average townsman thinks that farmers are wealthy, that they are whingers and that any assistance they receive is really a handout.

As farmers, we consider that it is industry, secondary industry and so forth, which is receiving the subsidies and handouts, but they are never called handouts when they apply, say, to the motor car industry; they are called assistance or subsidies and the stated idea is to keep people in employment.

The Minister stated that the Forests Commission was attempting to make jobs available, and I welcome that initiative. During the 1968 drought the Government made every effort to provide employment. For example, at that time, there was a special effort to provide employment in the Horsham area. Today there was discussion about 1,000 people who are unemployed in that area and

The Hon. M. A. Clarke.

the Minister for State Development and Decentralization said that the Government would try to do something about that. At this time we have no Regional Employment Development Scheme operating and we have no special form of assistance to enable farmers to obtain work.

The present position is that farmers' wives have been going out to work because a farmer cannot leave his property and leave his cows unmilked or his stock unfed. There are routine jobs which must be done on a farm and this prevents farmers from obtaining outside employment, although many of them are doing so. Because of this the farmers' wives have had to go out to work, often travelling long distances to resume school teaching or nursing.

The farmer's wife is not in quite the same position as a suburban wife -with all due respect to suburban wives-because she is an integral part of the running and management of the farm. She has her children to look after and she is probably the one member of the family who is able to run the children down to the school bus in the morning and pick them up in the afternoon. It is she who carries out a great deal of the business of the farm and, of course, when she leaves the farm the family is neglected, the farm is neglected, and the farmer is neglected, and it makes a great difference.

I return to the initiatives which the Government has claimed it has taken. I thought one of these had a pretty hollow ring. I speak of the assistance in regard to transport of stock to agistment. As I have told the Premier, there is just no agistment to which one can send stock. One could not estimate how many hundred miles it would be necessary to send them, even from northern Victoria, to find agistment. Even if one did so, it would not be worth the cost of transport and the cost of feed because the market for stock is so low. This initiative is appreciated, but it is a gesture. We would probably have been disappointed if it were not made, but it will not be of much help.


We do, however, have help with rail and road freight charges. The Minister of Water Supply referred to the slaughter of stock at Tongala, which is in the province represented by Mr. McDonald and myself. This has caused a great many people the deepest possible distress and when Mr. Wally Watts said on television that he had had many sleepless nights before this was carried out, I can understand his position. When he also said, "Don't blame us, the farmers of Victoria, blame the Governments of the world", I think there has hardly been a truer word said.

The trouble is that the Australian today says that the farmers were disposing of their emaciated stock. I was at the Rochester market last Friday as a seller, like so many farmers nowadays, or the majority of them, and it was not emaciated stock that was bringing disastrous prices. In fact, fat Jersey dairy cows were selling for $4.50. The bids would start at $2.50 and if the auctioner could get them up to $4.50 it was good. The Government has now initiated a payment of $5 a head for slaughtered animals, of which $4.50 will go to the farmer and 50 cents to the municipality. That is about the market price of a good, allegedly chopper, cow, but it is a fat cow, not an emaciated one.

I do not think it is possible to bring home to a townsperson the tragedy of selling for $5 a head one's good cattle, good dairy herds or good Hereford cows which are too old to carry through the drought, as one normally would. I think the Minister of Water Supply and the Minister for State Development and Decentralization are well aware of this, as I see they are nodding their heads in agreement.

What I am concerned about is that the farmer is getting such a low price for his meat but the housewife is still paying a comparatively high price. Who is getting the difference? Much of the stock being sold at such low prices is in good condition and I

should like all members of this Parliament to attend a country stock auction at the present time to see exactly what the buyers are paying for good stock.

The Hon. J. M. WALTON: Mr. Clarke ought to come down to the city and see what we pay for meat in the shops.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: That is entirely correct. I do come down to the city and I do notice what the suburban housewife is paying for meat in the shops. One of the things that make me angry is that there is such a gap.

It is said that the farmer is now getting some 20 cents in each $1 paid by the housewife to the butcher, although butchers' shops are declining in number. I understand there were 3,000 in Melbourne four years ago, but there are now only 1,900. I do not know whether the advent of the supermarket has reduced prices. However, somewhere between the auction and the retail counter somebody must be making a large profit.

What is worse, though-and I discussed this with a Federal Minister last night-is that prices to the United States of America have increased by 30 per cent over recent months, yet over the same period it would be conservative to say that prices in Victoria have fallen by some 50 per cent. I do not know what the exporters with export contracts are making out of this deal in the United States of America, If a Federal Government marketing authority or a Victorian marketing authority were established we might get some idea of where the profits are being made. There must be a tremendous profit between the appallingly low price farmers are receiving, which is for export cattle, and prices being received from America.

In all fairness to the Government, it should attempt to find out how this gap is created and where the profits are going. This comes back to a fair price to the farmer. If the housewife is paying $1 a pound-I do not


know whether Mr. Walton would agree that would be the price; I suggest that good meat would be much higher than that-the farmer should get his percentage of what the housewife is paying. What will happen is that production will be reduced and herds will be culled. In three or four years' time the housewife will be paying an astronomical price for red meat.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: It might be sooner than that.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: I believe Mr. Gross is fundamentally in agreement with what I am saying. It might occur in two years. If dairy herds are reduced, much higher prices will be charged for butter and cheese. In turn, these extra charges will go on to the consumer price index and be added to wages, so I do not suppose the average consumer will suffer much. But it is inevitable that these prices will rise considerably. One can see this situation arising. Mr. Gross says it will happen in two years; I believe it might be a little longer. Perhaps I am a little more pessimistic about farming and farmers.

The Hon. F. J. GRANTER: There could be a shortage of butter.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: I agree with the Minister of Water Supply. There will be a shortage of foodstuffs unless the Governments of Australia step in now and try to cushion the effect of the rural crisis. The one thing we are asking the Government to do is to take initiatives as soon as possible and put as much pressure as possible on the Federal Government.

We appreciate the amendment moved by the Minister of Water Supply. I foreshadow a further amendment asking for further initiatives. Members of the House agree to a great extent on this motion. The Government does not propose to reject it but intends merely to amend it.

Mr. Ward mentioned legislation against collusive bidding. If members attend auction sales at present they will find fifteen or sixteen beasts in a pen. So many are being marketed at present that auctioneers have little time in which to sell. They are given a time-table, and it is only possible to take one bid for the pen even though the cattle are owned by several people. That is what is happening.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: That is the one offer.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: It is just the one bid. Mr. Gross has probably seen that happen. However, there is legislation against collusive bidding.

The Hon. S. R. McDoNALD: It is impossible to implement such legislation or police it.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: I agree. I suppose it has never operated and it will never operate unless there is a shortage of meat. Then people will buy it at a higher price.

The Hon. R. J. LONG: Surely the farmer would be selling over the scales.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: I suggested earlier that the Victorian Farmers Union should propose a system of classification which relates to weight and grade.

I have been quoting the views of other people. My opinion is that we are bound to have a system of weight and grade, and classification, coupled with a minimum price. I can envisage no other future for beef producers of Australia unless that system is adopted.

Farmers who are efficient have laid by fodder. The old expression, which I believe is ridiculous, is that you lay up things for a rainy day. Today they are things for the drought.

The Hon. R. J. LONG: Would you favour a stabilization scheme?

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: Very much so.


The Hon. J. M. WALTON: At present.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: Farmers have been accused in the past of saying that when prices are good the sky is the limit, but when prices are low they want stabilization.

The Hon. H. R. WARD: That is human nature.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: That is so. Unfortunately we have to stifle human nature. We must control the farmer's prices when times are good. No doubt he will whinge about that, but he will not whinge half as much as he is at present when prices are so bad. If the farmer can expect stable prices and can see what will happen in the future, as wheat growers and tomato growers do, he will be much happier.

The Hon. J. M. WALTON: You are getting around to Labor Party policies.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: I do not know about that; perhaps the Labor Party is falling in line with my view and that of the National Party.

The Hon. S. E. GLEESON: During the wool boom this move was resisted strongly.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: That is so. Unfortunately, wool growers were short-sighted in that respect. If they could have looked into their crystal ball to the years ahead and if Mr. Gleeson, being a far-sighted man, had been able to warn them at the time of what was to come, the situation would have been different.

What divides the farmer from the townsman so acutely is that it is difficult to put across our way of life and our point of view to somebody who is living in a suburban house and watering his garden, with little prospect of drought affectin~ that garden. It is difficult to get those people into the country to show them how the farmer is living at present. I shall give an illustration to try to bring the message home. Mr. Tony Street, the Federal Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, told me last

night that when he landed his plane on his property the landing strip was free of cattle but as soon as the plane came to a halt it was surrounded by cattle. At present if a person starts a motor car, tractor or motor bike the cattle come from all over the farm.

A farmer must calculate how much hay he has to get him through the crisis. He can see that at the present rate of feeding he can carry the cattle through to the end of June or July. This is the position with farmers who have laid by fodder and who in the normal course of events would probably have two years' fodder in store. Now the fodder goes out so fast in a drought like this that the supplies are rapidly dwindling.

The Minister of Water Supply referred to Government initiatives. We appreciate the assistance for the brucellosis campaign and we should like to see Federal Government assistance in that field. Members of the National Party support the Minister's suggestion. We also support a number of other initiatives, but we believe that $4 million in loans is only a trifling amount. I know that some farms are not viable and if the farmers are lent money now they have no hope of repaying it. Mr. McDonald and I are dealing with such farmers every day and wondering what to do. It is a terrible thing to have to tell a farmer that you cannot see how he will survive. It is probably taking years off my life, and Mr. Dunn has told me the same thing. Loans can be only a temporary measure and ha ve to be repaid.

I hope the Minister for State Development and Decentralization, who is a grazier, will take part in this debate and give his ideas of what can be done to assist. An interesting contribution came from Mr. Grimwade, who referred to the average income .of farmers. It was found that farmers were averaging well below $100 a week. The Minister of Water Supply referred to a drop in income from $12,000 to $2,000 over a period of three years. If this happened in secondary industry it would mean the


closing of the business. If a secondary industry is not making a profit and has no prospect of doing so, it lays off its workers and closes down its plant.

The Hon. H. R. WARD: The workers go on the dole.

The Hon. R. J. EDDY: Some people call them dole bludgers.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: I do not subscribe to the general impression that everyone on the dole is a bludger.

The message I am trying to get through is that if the slide in rural prices continues, farmers will go out of business. Production will not cease altogether, but it will be seriously curtailed. This will have a bad effect on the finances of Victoria and it would have a tragic effect on the balance of trade. Forty-five per cent of our export income is earned by primary production. This year it is bound to fall; next year it will fall even further. Therefore, our balance of trade with other nations will be affected, and the whole future of Australia and the livelihood and interests of everyone in Australia will suffer.

I hope that by bringing this motion before Parliament members of the National Party have brought to the notice of honorable members the crisis that Victoria is facing. I conclude by repeating my invitation to honorable members who have not recently attended an auction sale of stock in the country to do so. If they do, they will realize that it is not just the poor or emaciated cattle that are bringing the Iow prices. I do not want to mention what I experienced last Friday with my cattle.

The Hon. S. R. McDoNALD: It was a fairly common 'experience last Friday.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: I think it was a universal experience. One seller had a pen of very nice vealers about seven months old in good condition. Two years ago, these vealers would have br-ought $110 or $120 because at that time the trade was asking for vealers and producers were

requested to market them off the cow fresh in that condition. Last Friday, that pen of veal'ers was finally sold with one bid of $5 a head to one of the meat firms.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: I will bet that they bring top prices in the butcher shops.

The Hon. H. R. WARD (To the Hon. J. M. Tripovich): You have to pay people to work in those jobs.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: Only about 2 "5 per cent of the total cost of the meat goes in labour; this is killing costs.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: I can give another example in regard to sheep for those who are involved in the pastoral industry. In Bendigo the other day, a pen of twenty fat culled rams were offered for sale and I am told that they were knocked down at 25 cents a head despite the fact that they had wool on them and there was some value in the skins. The buyer remonstrated when he was told that the killing costs for those rams would be $5. 75 a head, yet members of the Labor p.arty interject that costs of killing have not risen.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: Of course they have risen but not in the proportion that Mr. Clarke claims. I would like to know what the slaughterman gets on the chain with a chain full of bullocks or sheep. I guarantee he does not get that much out of it.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: Apparently Mr. Tripovich does not think that a slaughterman receives an exorbitant wage.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: He is getting a good wage but he is processing many animals.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: I appreciate that slaughtermen work hard because the job is not the kind of work that genUemen in this Parliament and many other people would like to do. However, the actual cost of processing and killing is far too high.


The Hon. B. P. DUNN: Animals of low weight are not sold because it makes th'e cost per pound too high.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: In partial reply to Mr. Dunn, another problem is that the meat works are not buying small good beasts because the cost of killing them is the same as for the much larger beasts. There is no differential and therefore the companies buy the larger beasts because they will cost less per pound to kill.

In conclusion, theS'e initiatives have been taken and we take note of them. We appreciate what has been done, but we believe a great deal more needs to be done. The Government will have to ensure that the primary industries of Victoria do not collapse to an alarmingly low level. They are not likely to collapse altogether, but they will collapse to a very low level and then members of the Labor Party will be saying that the price of food is terrible, that beef has gone up to $5 'Or $7 a pound, that they cannot afford to buy vegetables, milk and such things. The reason for that will be because assistance was not given at this stage to stop the dramatic decline in stock numbers and in production during the present crisis.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS (Western Province) : A most important and serious subject is being debated by the House. I compliment Mr. Clarke

; on what was probably one of his best , contributions in this House. Perhaps

the only criticism I can make of the original motion is the inclusion of the words .. severe drought" because that seems to imply that drought conditions exist throughout Victoria. That is not so. It is true that Victoria is experiencing a very dry

,autumn. I admit that in some areas ; drought conditions exist, but they do " not apply generally over the whole

of the State.

The Hon. A. K. BRADBURY: Mr. Gross must be in a favoured area.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: I am in nD more a favoured area than is Mr. Bradbury. Certainly, drought conditions do not exist in my area at present and it is necessary only to look at the stock to see that. In some areas of the Western District, crickets have accentuated the problem but these can be and have be'en controlled by some farmers in the area.

Another factor that has perhaps caused the extreme plight in the stock industry in some areas has been the over-stocking 'Of properties and lack of haymaking last year or the previous year. I put this down to the high cost of superphosphate over the past two or three years. Indeed, when the superphosphate bounty was prematurely withdrawn, I felt that it would take at least two or three years for the lack of superphosphate that I knew would not be applied to take effect. Unfortunately, I was wrong and so were many of my colleagues because the effects showed up in less than twelve months.

I drive regularly through what are normally the rich parts of the Western District from a grazing and not a money point of view and I can see the effect. In mid-December, when the season was, in countryman's language, tailing off, semi-green and drying off, the countryside looked reasonably good. A fortnight later, that same countryside was dead white, the grass had completely dried out, and three weeks after that any paddocks which had a reasonable number of stock in them were absolutely bare. There was no volume of feed there.

I suggest that this also applied in the Ararat and Ballarat areas through which I travel every week to come to Melbourne. Probably it has applied in several higher rainfall pastoral areas of the State as well. This is one of the major contributing factors to the present lack of fodder in the State. Those who were responsible for removing the superphosphate bounty in the past have a


lot to answer for. Instead of withdrawing it, they would have been doing the country a great service had the bounty been doubled.

All speakers in the debate have talked about the initiatives taken by this Government. The Ministers have outlined them in detail and I agree with the initiatives. Perhaps honorable members are looking a little too short-sightedly at this whole problem. Any of the initiatives which have been proposed and taken are, in the short term, proper. This helps one industry over a time of difficulty. In the past, other industries have been in trouble and similar proper assistance has been given. This debate has been fairly non-political and I hope it will remain that way. I hope the Federal Government and the Federal politicians will also be big enough to take the same attitude.

Everybody should have learned by now that it is time we looked at what is good for agriculture and what is good for Australia over the long-term future. I would also include in that all primary producer leaders and organizations because on many occasions they have been as divisive as any political party.

For many years in this House and elsewhere, I have been advocating changes in the marketing of our primary products and also changes in the constitution of the marketing boards. My suggestions have not always met with the approval of everyone but I was pleased the other night, in response to an interjection, that Mr. Dunn agreed it was time that this was changed.

The Hon. B. P. DUNN: In part.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: Mr. Dunn has to go more than just in part. He is falling into the old trap of propping it up, getting it going and forgetting about it. Whatever is done now will determine the future of agriculture for all time in Australia and also our standard of living. Admittedly, what I suggest is outside the jurisdiction of the Victorian Government, namely, that all marketing boards should be

completely reconstituted; that the dominant personages on the boards should be professional sellers and not primary producers as at present.

One board that has been mentioned in this House is the Australian Wheat Board, which is producer dominated. Everybody admits that the board has done a reasonable job but in fact it sells only 50 per cent of the wheat sold in this country every year, the rest being sold by private enterprise. I have noticed in the press lately a cry, even by the Chairman of the Australian Meat Board, that it is time that the board was reconstituted.

All marketing boards should have a limited number of members with the greatest expertise in selling that can be found. In turn, they should have key representatives in strategic centres around the world to feed back market information and to make necessary arrangements for quick sales when the opportunities arise.

One of the problems in the beef industry was caused by a lack of knowledge of what was happening in the European Economic Community and it was only when the meat mountain in the European Economic Community market grew to such proportions that our market collapsed and we found out what was known eighteen months earlier in those countries. I refer to the direction or the policy of the Governments in Europe to grow out their beef. This means that, instead of selling yearling beef at 400 lb. weight, they would keep the stock for a further twelve months and kill it at 600 lb. weight.

For twelve months, or perhaps two years, there was a shortage of beef throughout the world. This in turn was reflected in higher prices and a bigger demand in Australia. Suddenly, although the same number of cattle were being killed in the European countries there was not the same quantity of meat available, but 50 per cent more. Immediately there was a drop in price. This triggered off a slide in the beef industry in Australia.

Plight O} [12 MAy, 1976.] Primary Industries. 839

I am certain that the Federal Government can be convinced, and I believe it should be convinced, that marketing schemes such as I have previously proposed and propose again can be made to work, and that the schemes should be taken out of the control of the hurly-burly of politics to the greatest extent possible.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: And pressure groups from the farmer.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: I could not agree more. The motion which honorable members are debating has brought about a unity of purpose for the first time in this House, and it highlights the plight of primary producers and their products. Mention has been made of the articles and space given in the metropolitan media, the press, radio and television about what is happening in rural Victoria at present. This is very good because, for many years, there has been division between city and country, and this was sponsored and fostered by people in the past. We are all interdependent on one another, but the day the city or town person can buy cheap food and receive high wages has gone forever. This is the key to the whole problem.

Two or three years ago the average wage in Australia was about $80 to $90 a week. At that time food prices, particularly meat prices, escalated. Then wages started to increase. Why? The cry was that because meat prices and the cost of living had increased, food prices were causing inflation. That was the greatest lot of rot I heard in my life, and still is.

The Hon. J. M. WALTON: Who said that?

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: That was the cry from everyone at the time. It was a general cry.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: We will hear it again.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: Yes, we will hear it again. Inflation went on, and it was not because of food prices.

The Hon. J. M. WALTON: But it was prices, was it not?

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: No, it was wages which caused inflation.

The Hon. J. M WALTON: You have already said it was because of a rise in prioes that wages went up.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: There was a small rise in food prices, but it was only commensurate with what the farmer should have been getting at that time. Food prices were blamed for triggering off the high rate of inflation. It will happen again, as the Minister for State Development and Decentralization rightly interjected. As I said earlier, the average wage at that time was about $80 to $90 a week. Today it is about $150 or $160. It might even be higher, but has the average housewife applied a percentage of that increase in money to buying extra food? Not on your life. It has gone in a variety of other ways. Some of it has gone in taxation, I admit, but looking around the community at present, one can see that the average working person has never been better off in tenns of houses, cars, caravans, holidays, and so on.

What I am suggesting is simply this: There has to be an awareness and a realization by people in Australia that if they want to have food in the years to come, they must be prepared to pay for it. A fanner has to have an opportunity to live like a reasonable person in the community. This was one of the big differences I noticed overseas last year in most of the countries I was fortunate enough to visit. The fanners were heavily subsidized, and the people of those countries welcomed it because they felt if the fanner was getting a reasonable price for his produce, that in turn meant that there was not the possibility of their paying extremely high prices for their fiood. The prices for food in those countries was much higher than it is or was in Australia.

The Hon. R. J. EDDY: What were their salaries in those countries?

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: In a lot of them they were not as high as in Australia. In the United Kingdom, for example, one could not say that salaries were as high as those in Australia; they were about half.


The Hon. R. J. EDDY: But not in America.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: Our wage structure is very nearly on a par with that of America at present. The prices for food in America were two or three times the prices in Australia, and their farmers were treated as decent citi~ zens. The Canadian system was the same, and this could be said for al ~ most all the countries in the Western World. I could not say that for the Eastern countries; their situation is different.

There was an outcry in Australia when the superphosphate subsidy was restored. People do not stop and think of the other subsidies that come back to them. The wheat farmer is subsidizing the Australian consumer to the extent of about $70 million a year. Bread is still 50 cents a loaf, and without that $70 million subsidy it could be 65 cents or 70 cents a loaf. This subsidy has been in existence for many years. One of the officials of the graziers' association not long ago worked out exactly how much the wheat producer had subsidized the home consumption price in Australia over a period of twenty years. I think it came to about $700 million. That is big money, yet the superphosphate subsidy is worth about $60 million.

The Hon. C. A. M. HIDER: And that increases production.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: Quite right. Very little mention is made of the tariff support given to industry. This is given right across the board in secondary industry. A butter subsidy which was introduced years ago to keep the price of butter to the consumer down, was removed. It means less for the primary producer in the dairying industry, and he is the man in the most trouble at present. Who will be next? As I say, we have to look beyond doing things piecemeal. There has to be long~term planning. I know I have opposed the introduction of quotas on all forms of primary production over my lifetime. I am changing my views somewhat

now. Australian agriculture cannot survive unless it is properly planned and markets are researched. This has been the means of success in other places in the world. Australia is an exporting nation and must do the same. This country has the potential to produce; there is no question about that. The Australian primary producer is as efficient as any other primary producer in the world.

I believe I have said before that our destiny in this planet is bound up with the production of food. I do not believe, unless great technological advances are made, that there can be a great increase in production in other countries in this world because their land use is almost totally committed. There are still vast areas in this country which can be utilized for agriculture. It may mean, and I hope it does, that better use will have to be made of water and a better means of distribution adopted. It may also mean that other scientific aids will have to be used. These things are possible.

No farmer likes handouts. Any farmer would be more than satisfied if he were paid for his product a just price which was in line with the costs incurred in producing it. This, I believe is what we should be working for. ' I have a suggestion which may ease the burden on the dairy farmer at present. I know it will not be popular with the masses of the people, but it demonstrates what I have been trying to get across in this debate: There should be an immediate price rise of at least 2 cents a litre for whole milk sold in Australia, followed in a month's time by a further increase of 2 cents a litre. This would return approximately $20 million, and this could be put back into the farming areas and give an increased income to the farmers. I realize this would not be popular, but within twelve or eighteen months, people will be faced with rises greater than 2 or 4 cents in whole milk because there will not be production or producers in the country.


Mr. President, I am grateful to have had this opportunity of speaking on this motion, and I hope some of the things I have said will bear fruit in the future.

The Hon. J. M. WALTON (Melbourne North Province): There is no doubt that today the rural community has many problems. Producing a White Paper such as that which has been produced by the Government and blaming inflation is nat the answer. The problem is extremely invalved, as hanarable members have learned during this debate, and cancerns nat 'Only human elements but alsa the Almighty.

Victaria is suffering from the warst drought since 1923. One can travel in any directian from Melbaurne---I exclude the area in which Mr. Grass lives because I have not recently been out that far-and find that the paddacks are bare. Even in areas like Gippsland which at this time 'Of the year usually have lush pastures up ta 'One's knees the land is dry. The quality of the cattle and other animals is fast deteriorating and it has become necessary for great numbers of beasts t'O be slaughtered, as was recently publicized in the press and on television. This situatian is sad indeed when one considers that in other parts of the world each year millions of people die because they cannot obtain sufficient food, particularly meats and other proteins. There is samething terribly wrang with 'Our system. I knaw the cattle are poar and the difficulty in transporting them fram Australia to other countries is almast insurmountable but surely there must be some way in which they can be treated to make them transportable, perhaps without refrigeration, ta other countries that are poarer than our own. It may be possible ta dry or preserve the flesh by some means. Bacon can be transported around the world and does not seem to be affected by various climates.

Of course, this procedure would not provide any income to Australia because we would be expected to give the produce to those needy

countries. Mr. Len Reid, a former member of the Legislative Assembly, has been pressing Governments in this country to take actian along these lines far some time. He states that we ought not to be killing cattle just for ourselves but ought to be supplying countries which have starving communities.

The Hon. C. A. M. HIDER: That could be done even if a subsidy was required.

The Han. J. M. WALTON: That is correct because it is one way in which somebody else could be helped as well as the Victorian rural community. I do nat knaw whether much research has been dane inta the matter of transparting large quantities of meat from one side of the world to another so that it arrives in an edible condition.

The Hon. C. A. M. HIDER: It can be done but it is expensive.

The Hon. J. M. WALTON: It may be expensive but human life is also expensive. People are dying from lack of food. We have plenty of faod and even have to dispose of it. The Australian community does not need it. If it did, the monetary return involved wauld help the farmers out 'Of their trauble. This State is oversupplied with beef.

In the area with which I am involved hand-feeding of stock has been taking place far some time and farmers often wonder for what purpose. Recently a neighbour of mine wha sent nineteen cattle to the market received back a bill for $10. I suppase one could say that is cheaper than shaating the cattle and burying them, but that farmer has a wife and family ta feed. Both he and his wife have faund it necessary to go out to work. How they manage this with a young family I do not knaw.

This situation is reflected right thraugh cauntry towns to the greengracer, the hardware store and the motar car sales company, to the provincial towns, the larger towns and even the metropolitan area where


cars and tractors and other commodities are produced for the use of the farming community. As Mr. Gross and Mr. Clarke have said, efforts must be made to reorganize the marketing system for primary produce.

I thought I might have been speaking out of turn when I interjected during Mr. Clarke's speech but he seemed to agree with me that when conditions are bad farmers tend to want all sort of controls but when prices rise they are no longer interested in controls. That is understandable and reflects human nature. I suppose similar situations occur in the city. However, somewhere along the line the rural community must accept the organized marketing of its products. Only in that way will its problems be overcome. Even then the problems of the elements, droughts, floods and so forth, will have to be contended with.

Communist China, which I had the pleasure of visiting two years ago, has no such problem. The prices of commodities there are the same year in and year out. The amount of food that will be needed to supply the country is estimated and only that amount is grown. There is no surplus and no inflation, and the price remains the same year in and year out. Of course, I am not advocating that Victoria should turn to that sort of system in order to achieve the desired result but that e~treme demonstrates that it is possible to solve many of the problems of rural industry with a properly organized ruml community.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: The same system has broken down several times in Russia.

The Hon. J. M. WALTON: I think that is true. I mentioned China, but I bavealso been t'O Russia. In many respects I believe China's is a more industrious and rural community than is the Russian community. In China the people work extremely hard and long-ftor six days a week, for twelve hours a day---'and their pay is

not high. Nevertheless, nobody starves and there is no big waste or shortage of commodities unless floods or drought occur and then it is necessary, as it is in other countries, to buy commodities from somewhere else.

Municipal councils depend on people paying rates on time in order to obtain funds to carry out their works. They also are affected by problems in the rural industry. The present problem is complex and not easy to solve. It would be easy to say that the Government should be able to solve it but I am not sure that it can do so because certain for'ces are beyond even the control of the Government. At least the Government must ensure that the farming community is no worse off than the community in the metl"opolitan area and that country people who are out of work receiVte a decent wage or what is commonly called the dole.

To that extent, the person living on the land has some advantages. He can supplement his income with his own meat and vegetabl1es, and if he is lucky enough to have his property unencumbered, he will not have many expenses.

The H'On. M. A. CLARKE: What about council rates and water rates?

The Hon. J. M. WALTON: Farmers have to pay rates but their rates are much lower than those paid by the rest of the community. Farmers are rated on a farm I"ate which is substantially lower than that paid by people living in the towns and certamly much lower than that paid by people living in the metropolitan areas.

Although the Government has made a number 'Of subsidies available, no purpose is served in subsidizing fl"eight on fodder if one cannot buy fodder, if it ~s not eoonomical to buy the fodder to feed the cattle because they will die anyway, or if it would be cheaper to destroy them. There is nothing to be gained in subsidizing the


transport of stock to agistment if agistment is not available in this State. Other ways of assisting the farmer must be found.

I do not blame any particular Government for no longer providing the free milk that was previously given to school children. It might be a positive action, even if it were done for only twelve months until the industry got on its feet, to restore the free milk to school children. That would provide a stimulus to the dairying industry.

The Labor Party supports the motion moved by Mr. McDonald for the National Party. I am not sure in wha t form the motion will finish up because Mr. Clarke has already foreshadowed a further amendment. The Labor Party asks the Government to do whatever it can to help people in rural communities who have been suffering for a considerable time. If this matter is not treated urgently the whole country will suffer.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister for State Development and Decentralization) : As a country man I have listened with more than usual interest to this far-ranging debate and I commend Mr. McDonald for bringing it forward. Basically I agree with his analysis of the situation although I do not entirely agree with his conclusions. Perhaps the immediate subject of the debate has been overshadowed by an attempt by this Parliament-a timely and I believe a sincere one-to pursue some of the long-standing deficiencies in the rural situation. That has been appropriate.

The long-term measures discussed by members on both sides of the House who have considerable experience in the industry are not of much immediate advantage to the farmer, to the rural community, to the businessman, not just in the small town, to all people who are bearing the brunt of this crisis, to the people in the industries most affected, the beef and dairying industries, or to other industries in those areas of the State most severely affected by the drought. As

Mr. Walton bas pointed out, in some areas it is a drought whereas in other areas, as Mr. Gross has pointed out, it is just a bad, dry autumn. The effects of the seasonal stress, regardless of how severe or how mild they are, have certainly exacerbated in some areas a situation which was already deteriorating.

I shall mention some of the suggestions that have been put forward by various speakers which may be regarded as long-term proposals for improving this traumatic situation. Mr. Walton mentioned the prospect of surplus meat being used as a foreign aid component. This is an attractive proposition. Fifteen or eighteen months ago I attended a meeting of the representatives of meat producers in the Western District at which State and Federal politicians were present. The idea was canvassed there and received detailed analysis. Although it is an attractive proposal, it does not lend itself to immediate translation. The reasons for this are complex, and I do not believe much is to be gained by pursuing them now except to say that the Australian Meat Board has thoroughly considered the proposal. In fairness, the previous Federal Government considered it fully, and the present Federal Government is certainly doing the same thing.

Part of the difficulty is that the traditional diets of the people for whom this aid would be designed preclude them as ready recipients of meat in the form in which it could be transported to them. The transport of fresh meat implies that it must be refrigerated.

The Hon. S. R. McDoNALD: It also does not suit their religious beliefs.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: I am indebted to Mr. McDonald. That is another obvious barrier. There are considerable impediments to this proposal being adopted because of the religious beliefs of the people for whom the aid is designed. In other parts of the world where this barrier


does not apply, there are no facilities for the dissemination of fresh meat. Products such as canned meat or bully beef which would be quite acceptable to Europeans are not acceptable to them. There are also other difficulties which unfortunately are not amenable to a ready solution.

Mr. Walton mentioned the inevitable spin-off on the country towns and cities. It is refreshing for those of us who represent country areas to receive recognition from our colleagues on the opposite benches, and also to note that the metropolitan press-for the first time in my short experience in these matters-has given full and sincere coverage to the rural situation during the past few weeks, as Mr. Clarke mentioned. Considerable endeavours have been made to ascertain the extent of the problem, what it means and what its ramifications are. As previous speakers in the debate have rightly pointed out, the ramifications are considerable.

Apart from the 45 per cent component of export earnings, which Mr. Clarke mentioned is important, that is generated by primary industries, there is an inevitable spin-off in terms of a downturn in the domestic economy. Once the country goes sour, in spite of our alleged industrial sophistication, the impact will eventually be felt in the heart of the metropolis and of all metropolitan areas in Australia. This is happening certainly in those industries which depend considerably on the rural market, such as the manufacture of farm machinery and vehicles.

Mr. Walton mentioned the marketing and supply situation in Communist China, and what he said is broadly correct. In a totally controlled economy these sorts of fluctuations can be avoided, but I am sure it is not necessary to remind any member of this House that there is a certain price to pay for that. Quite clearly the Government of Victoria is not prepared to suggest that this type of answer is appropriate.

The Hon. D. G. Crozier.

In his lucid analysis of the situation, Mr. Clarke referred to the poor returns that the farmers and producers currently receive. He said that returns have seldom been lower in rural towns and mentioned a recent sale in Hamilton where the average price obtained was $15 a head. This morning I telephoned one of my contacts-a man who is actively involved in beef and cattle productionand he told me of a more recent sale where the average price was $8 a head. As has been pointed out, this is a traumatic situation and it cannot by any stretch of the imagination continue in this way, otherwise the industry will totally collapse. Certainly there will be some survivors, but they will not constitute an industry. It is impossible to calculate what this means in human terms. Therefore, quite correctly, producers are looking to Governments to take measures which are appropriate not so much in the long term as in the short term.

The proposals of the Victorian Farmers Union mentioned by Mr. Clarke are in the main appropriate, except for the union's advocacy of a State meat marketing board. The reason I have reservations about this scheme is that, broadly speaking, the first two items of the Victorian Farmers Union policy are also Liberal Party policy. The Victorian Minister of Agriculture has been foremost in pressing for the introduction of a classification scheme in the Australian Agricultural Council.

It is generally agreed that the structure of the Australian Meat Board ought appropriately to be reviewed. In the opinion of many producers its track record is less than impressive. This criticism may be unfair, but nevertheless it does not measure up well in comparison with other producer boards. One reason why its performance has not lived up to expectations is that its powers are not sufficient to enable it to cope with the present situation. .


The introduction of a classification scheme which is nationally recognized is usually admitted by most informed people to be an essential prerequisite of any meaningful reform of a marketing system. Certainly it is a prerequisite of any reasonable alternative to the present haphazard auction system of marketing. Largely for technical reasons, the introduction of such a classification scheme is some months away. Thanks again to the Victorian Minister of Agriculture, the proposal has been put forward, a firm date has been announced. and the target date is now January, 1977. The honorable gentleman has to be commended for his initiative in securing agreement amongst his colleagues on this target date.

The classification scheme is only the beginning. The reason I believe that the proposals of the Victorian Farmers Union for a red meat marketing board for Victoria are premature is that it also presupposes the introduction of a floor price. as Mr. Clarke mentioned. If by some means a floor price in Victoria could be funded, it would not apply solely to meat produced or killed in Victoria. I do not have to remind the House, with its galaxy of legal talent on all sides, that section 92 of the Constitution would loom largely in their considerations, and I can imagine what would happen in neighbouring States. Victoria is favoured with a goorl deal of trflffic frnm South Australia and New South Wales, and this wOllld become a flood. Unless ann until agreement is reached with neighbouring States, that type of scheme just would not work.

The Hon. M. A. CLARKE: Don't you think the farmers would block the roads from South Australia and New South Wales?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: The South Australians are pretty cagey; I have great respect for them and for the capacity of the South Australian Government to do things its way.

The Hon. J. M. WALTON: They would beat your mob any time!

Session 1976.-29

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: At least the South Australians of Mr. Walton's political persuasion can claim, as we cannot, that they enjoy the benefits of a Government presided over by the prettiest Premier in Australia, but that has nothing to do with the meat crisis.

The operation of section 92 would completely frustrate an initiative such as the one proposed by the Victorian Farmers Union, if Victoria took this initiative on its own. I do not believe the other argument put forward by Mr. Clarke, that Victoria should make this move with a view to pre-empting the Federal Government and the Australian Meat Board is plausible. The same argument wa~ used by the Victorian Government with greater validity in terms of the initiatives already taken.

The Minister of Water Supply referred to one of them when he reminded the House of what has been done by the Victorian Government in the brucellosis scheme. The honorable gentleman also reminded ho.norable members. that although thIS scheme was deSIgned in part to pre-empt a Federal response, and was carried into effect on this assumption, to date there has not been a firm ~uarantee that Federal funding of thIS proposal on a national basis will be commenced. The result is that bv the end of June this year, the $400.000 which is the statutory limit provided in the Cattle Compensation Fund will be exhausted, and unless an influx of Federal funding occurs, the futur~ of the scheme will be in doubt. This is an advantageous and timelv initiative, but it is only one of the initiatives.

In the short time that I have been privileged to be a member of the Victorian Cabinet, I can assure honorable members that the crisis in primary industry has loomed very largely on the agenda. Therefore the motion moved by Mr. McDonald, although finely phrased is in my opinion and that of the' Government outdated by events. It is not a question of urging the Government to

846 Plight 0) [COUNCIL.] Primary Industries.

seek the immediate co-operation of the Federal Government; my senior colleagues in the Cabinet would doubtless tell the House that this situation has been carefully monitored. The types of initiatives which seemed appropriate and possible had been discussed long before January of this year.

In fact, the deteriorating situation in the beef and dairying industries has for many months been of concern to all members on this side of the House, and consequently certain initiatives have been and still are being taken. In addition to the slaughter bonus or payment which was announced yesterday, the Premier today made a press statement-not all honorable members may be aware of thiswhich reads as follows-

The Premier is looking into ways of providing public works programmes to ease unemployment in country centres.

This is preferable to providing dole payments for farmers.

Mr. Ramer will put proposals to the Federal Government for assistance, which could be in the form of drought relief.

Mr. Ramer believes that it would be cheaper in the long run to get something constructive done.

Honorable members will recall that the alternatives to unemployment which were offered during the drought crisis of 1967-68 were administered by the State Government with a minimum of bureaucratic interference and a maximum of local control. Although I do not pretend that all this money was spent constructively, a great deal of it was, and it certainly relieved the worst consequences of what was then a crisis of real proportions.

As honorable members from all sides of the House have pointed out, farming is a risky business, but the risk factor and the uncertainty are accepted. The variation of seasons, the capricious nature of droughts, fire and flood, are inherent in the risks of a rural pursuit. I believe they are accepted and acceptable provided that other factors which presently apply are removed. Of course, the other factors are well known. The

The Hon. D. G. Crozier.

violent fluctuations in markets, the crippling rises in costs, the over-all uncertainty, are a culmination of factors which no group of people, however dedicated and hardworking, and however prepared they are to make sacrifices-in some cases enormous sacrifices-regardless of personal trauma, can sustain. There comes a time when it will not work economically.

Mr. Clarke and other speakers have referred to a vital factor, which is the crippling cost rises. This is why the apparent enigma exists of the gap between the return to the producer and the price over the counter. The reason is not difficult to find. I t is in the processing cost of meat, which is a dramatic illustration of how far the cost erosion has gone. Amongst other things, Mr. Walton said that the farmer did not have many other expenses. Mr. Clarke interjected that of course he did. It is not usually realized, but very few landed enterprises do not carry some debt. After all, very few businesses are free of debt. There are certain prime costs, shire rates, water rates, and so on.

The Hon. S. R. McDoNALD: And fuel.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: That is correct. If there is no income, sooner or later an intolerable situation is reached. Frankly, this situation exists for thousands of primary producers in the country, as honorable members are well aware.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: They even borrow to pay the interest.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: Indeed. I listened with interest to Mr. Elliot's contribution and it is refreshing to know that there are members opposite who have a personal knowledge and some considerable expertise in this industry. I am reminded that as recently as the early part of 1974 the Prime Minister came to the heart of a then thriving rural centre and made his famous pronouncement that farmers " never had it so good".


The Hon. D. E. KENT: Justifiably so.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: I admit there was some small justification for his comment. It is understandable that a Prime Minister of that philosophical bent, orientation and background would make that sort of comment, but I agree with Mr. Kent that there was some slight justification. At the time, most of the expertsnot all-were saying that meat was going to be in short supply and the best advice that they could give to people in the grazing industries was to increase their beef and upgrade the number of fat lambs which they were producing. I admit that most of us were willing to agree with that proposition. How wrong and shortsighted this was! On the shoulders of some of these so-called experts rests some of the responsibility for today's trauma.

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON: They are very hard to find now, are they not?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: I agree. Last year I had the privilege of going on a short trip with the Meat Industry Committee. Regrettably, my colleagues Mr. Eddy and Mr. McDonald were unable to accompany us. Despite that deficiency, we discovered a great deal about the situation in the northern regions. When we tentatively inquired how bad the situation was in the cattle industry, we were given the usual short northern answer that if a cattleman was married to a teacher or a nurse he might survive. While in Broome we met a man who a short time before had been running a large cattle prop;erty in the West Kimberleys. We asked him what he was doing in Broome and he told us that, being a versatile man, he was working on a pearling lugger. I asked him what he did with the cattle, and he said "We wired up the cheque book and shut the gate". That is the northern response. He is probably still in the pearling lugger. Being a versatile

fellow, when marketing improves doubtless he will return to the West Kimberleys.

The pOint of the story is that there will be survivors, but at a cost. When the market improves this man and a few hardy souls like him will return to this rugged country. There will still be survivors among cattle owners and managers, and fortunately, some survivors amongst the cattle, because they are bred to survive. However, this is no answer to the problem. There is a requirement to proceed with the long-term policy. I agree that it is difficult to get agreement among primary producers. I have had some little experience in common with many of my colleagues, on how difficult this is, but under the stress of this sort of trauma one of the few desirable products is that often some reasonable agreement is reached. It took a considerable downturn in the fortunes of the wool industry to obtain an agreement.

The Hon. D. E. KENT: It took the right sort of Government, do not forget.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: Yes, the sort of Government that pulled the rug from under the support price for wool. Not so long ago the welcome mat was out in Warrnambool for a certain Federal Minister for Primary Industry. We had the red carpet out and an empty chair on the stage but he did. not appear. This happened three tImes. I am afraid that invitation has been withdrawn.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett): Order! This is not relevant to the motion.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER: That invitation no longer exists. I am afraid its time has expired. It took this sort of duress to achieve the degree of consensus among woolgrowers which could have been achieved years before. Hop~fullv, onp of. the few desirable consequences of thIS truly dreadful situation in the animal production industries will be some reasonable consensus for a better alternative, or at least for a


parallel alternative to the present system of stock disposal. This rem'ains a major challenge to producers, producer organizations and to Governments, but the immediate problem is not policies to suit the long-term needs of the industry. The immediate problem is to mitigate the damage of a crisis which with hindsight may have been ~oreseen, but in fairness to those in resP'Onsible positions, hopefully was not anticipated. It has been va'stly exaggerated by seasonal conditions. The immediate initiative and challenge is for G'Overnments with initiatives. I do not agree with Mr. M cDon ald that the Government needs to be prompted to take further initiatives.

I therefore support the amendment that the Government should be supported in the initiatives already taken and which will undoubtedly be forthcoming, until there is considerable and manifest 'improvement in the situation of Victoria's hard-pressed primary producers.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH (Doutta Galla Province): I am delighted to enter this debate. I was reared on a farm and worked on farms, in wheat, wool, and dairying, and I suggest to the House that it is only in the past twenty years that the occupants of farms have ever seen the title deeds to their properties. Their fathers and grandfathers never saw them. Of course, farming has had a history of total indebtedness to the banks 'and moneylending agencies. Frankly, had it not been for A. E. Gibs'On senior we W'Ould not have had a farm in the first place, and if it had not been for that firm we would n'Ot have been able to stay there.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIoT: Where does that firm operate from?

The Hon. J. 'M. TRIPOVICH: In Collins Street, and he lived in Glenroy.

Indebtedness has been the whole history 'Of farming. I refer to the gross rural indebtedness to institutionallenders by the farmers of the State. I do not wish to read the whole chart, but

I shall refer it to honorable members if they want to check these figures. The National Agricultural Outlook Conference put out a publication through its Bureau of Agricultural Economics. I quote from table 12 which appears on page 23. The statistics of the farmers' holdings 'of liquid assets have been accumulated through the Bureau of Agricultural Economics since 1961. I will take three yearly pedods from 1963. In 1963 farmers' liquid holdings were $894 million, on which they had borrowed $22 million in term loan components. Their total borrowing from the major trading banks totalled $495 million. $214 million was loaned to them by the pastoral finance companies. There was $45 million loaned to them from the Development Bank; $52 million was loaned to them from assurance societies; $113 million loaned to them from the war service and land settlement schemes; and $166 million .from other Government agencies, including the State banks. This gave them a total gross indebtedness of $1,085 million, which was far in excess of their liquid assets. That has always been the history of farming.

In 1966, which was before the Whitlarn era, the farmers' holdings of liquid assets had grown to $943 milliion of which they had $74 million as term loan component; $650 million total borrowing from the major trading banks; $250 million from the pastoral finance oompanies; $92 million from the Development Bank; $75 million from assurance societies; $99 million from the war service and land settlement schemes; $245 milli'On from other Government agencies, giving them a total indebtedness of $1,411 million. That is nearly $600 million more. In 1969--this is a further three-year period-liquid assets had grown to $935 million. The term loan c'Omponent had grown to $127 million.

The Hon. I. A. SWINBURNE: That was a result of inflation.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: That is so, and these people are paying higher rates of interest. The total borrowing fr'Om the major trading


banks had more than doubled; it was $939 million. The pastoral finance companies, which were happy at that stage to help farmers meet their problems, were owed $338 million. Total debts to the Commonwealth Development Bank were $162 million; to insurance companies $113 million; and under the war service and land settlement schemes $83 million. The amount owing to other Government agencies, including State banks was $330 million. The total indebtedness of the rural community was $1,965 million. It had risen by another $500 million.

I did not have time to research all comparative figures but I refer honorable members to a publication of the National Agricultural Outlook Conference dated 4th-6th February, 1976, and an article entitled "The Farm Situation in Australia". The farmers' holdings of liquid assets grew in the five years to 1974 from $935 million to $1,295 million. I do not know what the short-term loan component had grown to but the total amount owing to the banks was $1,220 million. Indebtedness to the pastoral companies had dropped from $338 million to $279 million. These people are loyal friends of the farmers when they are doing well. Why are they now pulling out their cash and forcing farmers to borrow money from other sources of credit? The amount owing to the Commonwealth Development Bank rose from $162 million to $232 million. However, the amount owing to insurance companies dropped from $113 million to $104 million; the insurance companies were getting out. The total indebtedness for 1974 was $2,402 million. That was over twice the first sum I quoted for 1963.

In 1963 liquid assets amounted to $894 million and indebtedness amounted to $1,085 million. Today the assets amount to $1,295 million and the indebtedness is $2,402 million. Insurance and pastoral companies are pulling out their money because there is a danger the farmers might not be able to meet their

debts. This is forcing farmers to borrow at a higher price. Does that not have something to do with the problem or is it all a matter of the cost of labour on the farms?

I direct the attention of honorable members to an article in the Australian Financial Review of 7th July, 1975, under the heading, "Stock Slump may well ruin the man on the land". It says that Australian pastoral houses have undertaken a massive retreat from their financial support of the rural community and the problems affecting a large number of farmers begin to deepen to the hopeless stage. This is what I was directing attention to by referring to the figures I have quoted. The article states that the gap left by the pastoral houses appears to have been at least partly filled by the Commonwealth Development Bank and the various State rural assistance schemes. I do not want to say this in defence of the Hamer Government or of the Australian Government but I point out that the Government institutions have not been disloyal and the past Governments have not been disloyal to the rural communities when they have had problems.

According to the figures I have quoted, Government agencies have lent more and the private agencies have lent less. It is a tribute to the Government agencies that they have lent money at a much better interest rate than can be obtained from private agencies. I pay particular tribute to the Rural Finance and Settlement Commission of Victoria, and its chairman, Mr. Horton, for their magnificent work.

Most of the money lent by the pastoral companies was lent on cattle and sheep. Mr. Gross will agree that the area we came from was wheat and sheep country. But a lot of fat cattle came into the area over the years because farmers were diversifying their production. This has caused problems because the area had a rainfall of 15 inches. When there


is a shortage of water there is a shortage of feed and farmers must get rid of cattle.

Honorable members should have a close look at the reasons why some farmers drove 1,000 head of cattle to a killing point, shot them, and buried them, the day before yesterday. This is a dreadful state of affairs. But the cattle were not prime cattle. They were the oldest of the choppers and of absolutely no value. I well remember the business acumen of the late Sir William Angliss, who was once a member of this House. When farmers were short of feed he would buy their cattle at bedrock prices, kill them and put the meat in the cold stores and sell it later at the highest prices. Have the master butchers not been through these areas buying as many of the better choppers as they could? Are some of these Victorian cattle bought by the master butchers not being fattened in feed lots in New South Wales to bring them up to prime condition in a minimum time? Are meat prices any cheaper in the butcher shops?

I believe these cattle were killed for the same reason as unions demonstrate, to direct attention to their problems. The oldest cattle on the farms were shot at a well-publicized shoot to bring pressure on both State and Federal Governments to provide relief. I do not rebuke the farmers for their activities, but I think that is obvious. In relation to the beef Inarket, I point out that the Meat Board is increasing export controls on meat for the United States of America because Australia is running close to its total quota. The standards are improved and that market is considerably reduced.

The newspaper comments that there is no break in the common market situation and states that prices in South-East Asia are very low and that Japan is making only token noises about taking beef. It points out that all of this makes it

The Hon. J. M. Tripovich.

very difficult to sell the beef available for the 1975-76 year. This has seriously affected the sales of beef.

I have a couple of comments to make in relation to the MalIee and Wimmera farmers. When the Labor Party introduced wheat stabilization it had difficulty with the marginal areas where wheat should never have been grown. Now, a lot of people have gone into cattle in marginal areas. I do not say this with hindsight. They took the chance but it did not come off. The report says that the Mallee and Wimmera are mainly wheat areas but that cattle came into the district during the boom. It points out that farmers in the area are now having difficulty in finding water for their stock. All these things contribute to the problems and they contribute more than labour costs.

Some things which have been said should not go unanswered. I commented to Mr. Clarke on the labour cost of killing animals. I had not studied this subject for a long time so I examined the awards and found that a slaughterman receives $1.78 a body. A body can vary from a decent-sized veal er of between 400 and 500 lb. to an animal weighing 1,200 lb. Let us take an average of 1,000 lb.

The Hon. H. M. HAMILTON: Is the slaughterman paid by the beast?

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVlCH: Yes. He puts through roughly twenty a day and is credited together with fringe entitlements $36 for his day's work. On some chains there are between 50 and 80 slaughtermen. If each slaughterman on a 50-man chain kills twenty beasts a day, that means that 1,000 cattle will be slaughtered and the payments to the slaughtermen amount to $1,990. There would be about five or seven labourers on the chain· cleaning up, oiling and so on. They receive the magnificent sum of $120 a week. The five would receive a total of $120 for the day so the total cost would be $2,110. If the 1,000 bodies contains 800,000 lb. of meat where do the profits go? In


the abattoirs, the recoup from the sale of hides, edible offal and so on is expected to cover the cost of killing.

The Hon. I. A. SWINBURNE: That is not so now.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: The recoup might be down a little now, but that has been accepted. But we are considering 800,000 lb. of meat.

The Hon. F. S. GRIMWADE: That figure is too high. The average weight of dressed animals is about 450 lb.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: A good-sized vealer weighs between 400 lb. and 500 lb.

The Hon. F. S. GRIJMWADE: That is live weight.

TIle Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: Would Mr. Grimwade accept 500,000 lb. of meat?

The Hon. F. S. GRIMW ADE: No.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: I suppose Mr. Grimwade would want to take out the bones. It is not the man on the killing chain who is taking the money. I would guarantee that the auctioneer would earn nearly as much. I have kicked around this country for a long time and even if I have not owned farms I hope it can be said that I have an interest in the conditions of farmers. When the Labor Party introduced wheat stabilization after the second world war, it also wanted beef producers to sell their meat over the hook at 10 pence a lb., but they would not take that. They wanted to send their stock to Newmarket and gamble on the price they would receive. I do not blame them for that. Like the workers, they wanted to get what they could. The beef producer will insist on a floor price when prices are low but he will not talk about a ceiling price when they are higher. Just as it took years to convince the wheat farmers that stabilization was a good thingthey would not have anything else now-everything possible should be

done to convince the beef producer that he would be better off with a stable price at all times.

It was a non-Labor Government which first took the bounty off superphosphate. That was not many years ago. There was a logical reason for this. The original purpose of the bounty was to persuade farmers to use more superphosphate; it was not to persuade them to put excess quantities on to their property. I know what superphosphate has done for this country. In the middle section of the north-eastern area, as Mr. Swinbume well knows, what was previously one sheep to the acre country has been improved to three or four sheep to the acre through the use of superphosphate. This has happened around Maryborough and the gravelly country in that area. As Mr. Swinburne rightly interjects, once you apply superphosphate you have to keep applying it, and in many cases, increase the application. Whether that is a good or a bad thing I do not know, but honorable members who have experience will know that the supply is not limitless.

The same principle applies to the wool industry. The wool industry follows the general story in farming, where 80 per cent of the farmers will produce 20 per cent of the crop and 20 per cent of the farmers will produce 80 per cent of the crop. I do not want to be held to those figures as being accurate but broadly speaking that is the basis of farming through all its aspects, so the major portion of any subsidy payment goes to the more stable 20 per cent.

There are a number of people farming today who are not farmers, and who have no intention of being farmers. They have been forced into it on the basis of investment. It was considered more prudent to invest money in property because it grew at a faster rate than if it was left in the bank, in these times of inflation.

Today we have many so-called Collins Street farmers. I am not saying that is bad. One used to sit in


a corner of the Chamber, and of course I refer to Sir Arthur Warner. Sir Arthur Warner could talk farming like an expert, just as I suggest Mr. Elliot can. With regard to stud stock breeding and farming generally, Sir Arthur Warner was an ornament to the profession, if I can call it that. He had an excellent farm at Yea. He looked after it and husbanded it correctly and did a magnificent job. However the whole of his incentive was to get the best value for his money. It was not his main source of income.

I next refer to the dairying industry. Honorable members may recall that a cost survey was conducted in the late 1940s. It was shown that a farmer properly milking 30 cows was making more than a farmer milking 90 cows. The latter herd would be scrubbers with scrub bulls and the survey pointed out that those farmers were wasting a lot of energy.

Referring to the use of family labour in the dairying industry, there has never been more than 8 per cent of hired labour in the dairying industry. It has always been family labour and it is conceded that the wife and the other members of the family should be paid for their labour but should not be expected to receive award wages for the work they do.


The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: Prior to the suspension of the sitting I was discussing a hypothetical case in relation to the killing of animals. I mentioned that on a chain there could be 50 slaughtermen who would earn an amount of $1.78 a carcass and the total of their earnings, together with fringe payments, would be approximately $39 a day. Five labourers would earn $120 a day, giving a total cost of approximately $2,110 a day. If 1,000 carcasses average 500 lb. a carcassI accept Mr. Grimwade's quire proper statement that the carcasses would

average that weight-there would be 500,000 lb. of carcass available for sale.

In covering the wages of the slaughtermen and labourers I said that it was estimated in the trade that those who killed the cattle recouped the costs from the sale of the hides and edible offal. That situation applies only in normal times and presently, of course, hides are not bringing good prices.

Added to those costs there are many other things, such as capital charges, and I do not want the House to feel I am including those in the amounts recouped by the sale of hides and edible offal. Another significant cost factor at the present time is workers compensation for slaughtermen. I believe the present rates for slaughtermen's workers compensation are higher than in any other industry because it is a high-risk industry.

Eating habits in this country have changed and Australians now eat considerably less butter than the ration allowed for each person during the war. There is no doubt that those who advised the dairying industry on the projected sales of butter have been wrong. Butter today is regarded as simply another spread and it must be made palatable and attractive if its consumption is to be increased. When one is served in a cafe today one gets a small piece of butter wrapped in foil and that is the ration allowed for each person; even then many people do not bother to eat it.

Mr. Walton referred to the supply of milk for children, but when one observes that milk which is often allowed to remain in the hot sun after it has been delivered to the school, one is somewhat alarmed at the waste. Milk is not as popular a drink as many people believe and, therefore, the deliveries of milk to schools oft-times do not provide the nutrition that was intended.

As I said, our eating habits have changed, and I think the industry itself can accept some responsibility


for popularizing milk as a drink and butter as a spread. This can be done. It has been done with wool by mixing the fibre with synthetics and it can be done with both butter and milk.

] now come to the question of socalled organized buying. This has gone on for many years and will continue to do so, because it is almost impossible to police. My family were initially involved in The wheat and wool industries and in those days it was generally accepted that' the n1erchants met in Melbourne to decide how much they intended to pay for a bushel of wheat. One could go from agent to agent on the following Monday and it would not matter whether the prices were low, such as 1/8d., 1/7d. or 1/6~d. a bushel that applied in 1930, there was no disparity between agents. There was no competition unless an agent wanted to fill a quota for export, when he might increase his offer by a halfpenny a bushel until his quota was obtained and then the price would return to what it was.

With sales of animals one sees buyers on behalf of agents going from pen to pen assessing the stock and, whilst one does not overhear the conversation, one knows that what is being said is, in effect, "That is your pen, and that is my pen. Those are your beasts, and these are my beasts." That practice has gone on for many years and there is no such thing as a true auction in the sale of stock.

Many people who now live in the cities have come from country areas ~nd I emphasize that my party has not lost its interest in or sympathy for country people or country issues. Although the Labor Party is often accused of having no interest in the country man it is my belief that many of us have worked for country industries, both inside this place and out of it, far harder than some members of other parties, and I do not wish to take anything away from them.

I believe the farmer and the worker have much in common. They are not at opposite ends of the scale. The

farmer gets as much as he can from his productron, as does the worker for his labour. I believe both' of them get less than their fair entitlement, and until that can be properly assessed things will not improve. The only assessment now made is on a work-value basis, but just as wheat prices have been stabilized I hope the time will come when dairy produce prices will also be stabilized, if it is still considered an essential industry. I must say, with some regret, that I doubt whether it will be. I was told fifteen years ago that it would be possible to reduce our dairying industry production by 50 per cent and still produce a surplus. That is being borne out today. However, if the industry continues it must continue on a stabilized basis.

Mr. WaIton said that the Labor Party will support the National Party's motion. I am attracted to the motion without the Minister's amendment. If the National Party wishes the amended motion to have the unanimous support of all members of this House, the Labor Party would be prepared to vote for the amendment. The resolution could then be forwarded to the Australian Government in the hope that it would achieve some help for the rural industries which are suffering great disadvantage at the present time.

On the motion of the Hon. S. E. GLEESON (South-Western Pro-vince), the debate was adjourned.


WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (AMENDMENT) BILL.

The Hon. A. J. HUNT (Minister for Local Government): I move-

That this Bill be now read a second time. The Bill consists of sixteen clauses, the first fifteen of which are identical with those contained in a Bill which I introduced to this House on 11 th November last. I do not propose to take

854 Weights and Measures [COUNCIL.] (Amendment) Bill.

up the time of the House by going over the ground which I then covered and which is reported in Hansard commencing at page 8250. I will therefore content myself with merely dealing with the new material which is contained in clause 16.

That clause deals with what is known as metrication in the market place. I emphasize that it does not raise the issue of the desirability or otherwise of metric conversion, which is in fact under way, but deals with the means of ensuring the smooth operation of a course which is already w~ll advanced.

It will be obvious to honorable members that, human nature being what it is, many traders will seek to convert the scales or units of measurements in their shops to metric units at the last possible moment, and that last possible day is 31 st December, 1977. A little reflection will indicate that in November and December, 1977, unless some decisive and positive action is taken, confusion and chaos is likely to result as a substantial number of traders throughout this State seek to convert scales and other units of measurement to the metric system.

It seems clear that the only way of avoiding the chaos and ensuring the smooth transition to the metric system is for the changeover to take place progressively throughout the State between now and December, 1977. It also seems apparent that to achieve this, areas will need to be chosen and converted to the metric system one by one. This will enable the best use to be made of manpower and also enable firms which supply new equipment or convert old equipment to the new system to undertake their work more smoothly.

Trader associations have seen this need for some time and, in a number of areas, chambers of commerce or groups of traders have passed resolutions for the orderly conversion in their area of activity. The difficulty has been, however, that this cannot be enforced because no sanctions exist. There have been areas where

The Hon. A. J. Hunt.

general agreement has been reached :to proceed to metric conversion which, however, has been broken by perhaps a single trader who has felt that he might gain a trading advantage by remaining for the time being with the imperial system. This is understandable because the price per pound will appear to be less than the price per kilo, as will the price per yard when compared with the price per metre.

The Hon. I. A. SWINBURNE: What about the gallon and the litre?

The Hon. A. J. HUNT: That is the opposite, but when one talks of litres as compared with pints, then my argument holds good. A number of trader associations have asked the Government to assist them in assisting in this orderly process of conversion to ensure that the complete changeover can take place satisfactorily by the end of next year.

The matter was the subject of discussion at an officers' conference held in Adelaide in December last and there was unanimous agreement that legislative action should be taken to enable a progressive transition to metrics to occur. Three States have already acted upon that decision or are in the course of doing so and the Bill now introduced makes Victoria the fourth-we are not in the forefront this time-to move towards this orderly process. I might add that chambers of commerce in general support the move, as have many trader associations. I am unaware of any organized group of traders who oppose what is now proposed.

Clause 16 will enable the declaration of areas in which metric conversion will take place either generally or in specific trades or types of shops, progression from the dual system of metrics and the old imperial to sole metrics, and will also enable the making of regulations to ensure that this is carried out in a way which protects both the traders and the public.

Mental Health [12 MAY, 1976.] (Amendment) Bill. 855

In the administration of the new provision, it is my intention to ensure that there is the maximum possible consultation at all stages. It is not proposed that metrication in advance of the due date will suddenly be imposed upon an unwilling area with no prior consultation. Consultation will be the order of the day and where possible the agreement of traders will be expected as a prerequisite.

I t will mean that some traders will be forced to metricate a little earlier than might otherwise have been the case but, of course, by the end of 1977 the change from one system to the other will in any event be compulsory. The purpose of the Bill is to enable the changeover to be orderly, simple and without problems that would otherwise ensue with a sudden change all on the one day. I commend the Bill to the House.

On the motion of the Hon. D. G. Elliot, for the Hon. J. M. WALTON (Melbourne North Province), the debate was adj1ourned.


MENTAL HEALTH. (AMENDMENT) BILL.

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health): I move--

That this Bill be now read a second time. This short Bill makes four unrelated amendments to the Mental Health Act 1959. Those amendments empower the Governor in Council in certain circumstances to appoint a temporary chairman of the Mental Health Authority, substitute the title "manager" for "secretary" in respect of the senior administrative officer in institutions established under the Act, enable the authority to appoint persons who are not qualified psychiatrists to be the superintendents and deputy superintendents of training centres and empower the Governor in Council to cancel the registration of a " day-training centre".

Dr. Alan Stoller, the incumbent Chairman of the Mental Health Authority, retires on 25th M'ay and

the question of filling the vacancy arises. At present authority members and acting members are appointed as follows-

Section 5 of the principal Act oonstitutes the Mental Health Authority and provides for the appointment of a chairman and other authority members by the Governor in Council for a period not exceeding five years.

Section 8 provides for the filling of extraordinary vacancies on the authority but expressly excludes " vacancies by retirement" as coming within the ambit of the section.

Section 9 makes provision for the appointment of acting members in the case of illness, absence or suspension of the chairman or a member of the authority.

It is clear that when a member retires his successor has, under the present provisions of the Act, to be appointed under section 5. In the ordinary course of events that procedure would be followed. However, there is some doubt as to whether the present provision contained in section 5 would enable the Governor in Council to appoint a person to the vacant office of chairman from 26th ,May for an undefined term which would expire when the proposed Health Commission becomes operative and is ready to take over the mental health services. It will not be possible to define this term precisely on 25th May when, as I have said, the present chairman retires.

Accordingly the new provision contained in clause 2 of the Bill, which inserts a new sub-section (4) into section 8 of the principal Act, provides the required flexibility of action in relation ,to the filling of the vacancy on a short-term basis.

The Mental Health Authority has advised that owing to the changing patterns in the establishment structure of institutions under the Act the present statutory title of ~, secretary " no longer adequately describes the functions of the senior administrative

856 Business Franchise [COUNCIL.] (Tobacco) Bill.

officer in an institution. It has recommended that the title of " manager It,

which is more descriptive of the functions performed by such an officer and which is in accordance with m'odernday practice in hospital administration, be adopted. Clause 3 of the ~ill gives effect to the rec?mmendat.lOn by making the approprIate substItutions in sections 18, 26, 60, 62, 63, 88, 91, and 100 of the principal Act.

Cl1ause 4 amends section 26 (1) of the Act to permit the appointment of persons who do not neoessarily hol? psychiatric qualifications to the POSItions of superintendent and deputy superintendent of a training centre. At present the section requires such persons to be qualified psychiatrists. The function of a training centre is to provide for the welfare, education and training of intellectually defective persons on a full-time residential basis. The GOVlernment believes that the superintendent and deputy superintendent should be the best qualified persons available in the field of training the intellectually defective, irrespective of the discipline in which those persons are qualified.

Clause 5 inserts a new sub-section (5) into section 35 of the principal Act to enable the Mental Health Authority, with the approval of the Governor in Council, to cancel the registration of a day-training centre. At present such centres are registered under section 35, but there is no power of cancellation. It is considered desirable that such a power should be written into the section to enable cancellation to be made in cases where the centre has ceased to fulfil the needs of the community, is seriously mismanaged or has failed to 'Observe the conditions relating to grants and subsidies. I commend the Bill to the House.

On the motion of the Hon. D. G. ELLIOT (Melbourne Province), the debate was adjourned.


The Hon. W. V. Houghton.


The debate (adjourned from the previous day) on the motion of the Hon. V. O. Dickie (Chief Secretary) for the second reading of this Bill was resumed.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT (!VIelbourne Province): This is a revenueraising measure. Certain anomalies have crept in, as so often happens with legislation, and the Government is rectifying the position as soon ':is possible. The Government has. saId that the Bill is urgent. It was mtroduced yesterday and the Government expects it to be passed today, and my party sees no reason why the Government should not be obliged in that direction.

As the Minister explained, the purpose of the Bill is to ~eme~y cert~in matters which have arIsen In relatIOn to the licensing of wholesale tobacco merchants under the provisions of the Business Franchise (Tobacco) Act 1974. The licensing system was introduced in the first place to enable the Government to obtain something out of people smoking cigarettes. When one considers the price of a packet of cigarettes today, it appears that the Government has gone about as far as it can go-frankly, I think it has gone too far.

You, Mr. Presid~nt, may say that those who smoke cIgarettes as a pastime should discontinue the habit. If such is the case, I must accept your views but such views could equally be applied to persons who consume a small tot of whisky, a glass of beer or, for that matter, the way 'Our lives are going at the moment, it cou~d be. said that a person was engagIng In a dangerous habit if he made love too often. I think we are overdQing the whole thing.

The situation is becoming farcical. Although I subscribe most heartily. to pointing 'Out the dangers of smok~ng tobacco in any shape 'Or form, I thInk it is a negation of democracy to compel a manufacturer to denigrate his own product on the packet. It is the


complete opposite 'Of the rights that I stand for. The same thing could apply to a person who consumes a little alcohol, which in so many cases affDrds him the chance of escaping frDm the realities of life and enjoying the conviviality and friendship of friends.

The Hon. O. G. JENKINS: Is it not fair enough to point out the risk?

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: Sometimes, I think this HDuse needs an ear specialist because I thought I made it quite clear that, whilst I personally support the idea of advising people of the dangers of smoking, I do not agree that a manufacturer should be fDrced tD denigrate his own product. I stand by that statement and I think the Government is persevering with this attitude in so many respects that it has a big brother quality about it, which is dangerous to our society. Sometimes, I think it is even mDre dangerDus than the very tragic effects that I understand smoking tobacco has on the human anatDmy. However, there should be a freedom of choice after it has been pointed out that 'One might be a darned fool in the first place for taking up the habit. Beyond that it is up to a man to make his own choice in life. This was quite an innocuous piece of legislatiDn when it was first introduced because the am'Ount then was 1·25 per cent 'Of turnover. In consolidated revenue terms that netted the GDvernment about $1·5 million in a single year. Under this Bill the Government will receive from persons WhD smoke tDbacco of any description, whether it be a cigarette, cigar 'Or a philosDphical pipe as Mr. Swinburne has---'and he handles it like a profes'sional-n'Ot less than $15 million, but probably $20 million in revenue. I am not making a big issue of this because the GDvernment has tD secure revenue somehDw or other. In State spheres sometimes the raising 'Of revenue i,s a difficult matter. I think the Government has realized how far it can go in certain areas, such as third-party insurance. The Government has pulled its horns in,

and hDnorable members heard confirmatiDn of that tD a certain extent from the Chief Secretary tonight.

When 'One goes intD the price of a packet of cigarettes and hDW much is taken up in excise duty, as well as sales tax, and when 'One IDOks at the price of a glass of beer 'Or a nDggin of whisky, the person who indulges moderately in what might be called the pleasant vices-that is smoking a cigarette, having a snort 'Or two with his friends and trying tD back a winner at the races-one realizes that he has tD pay dearly for that pleasure. I think he is paying tOD much. On a cDuple 'Of occasions I have threatened, even though I am a Labor Party member, t'O fDrm a sportmen's party which would CDnsist entirely of those WhD enjoy a cigarette, cigar or maybe smDke pipe tobacco, those who like a convivial drink with their friends, and those who go to the races and try fruitlessly or successfully to back a winner.

If we said no mDre we might achieve a success that wDuld astDund us all. I spoke with the High Lama 'Of Shangri La and asked him if he WDuld care tD pass 'On tD me a bit of advice in relation to living. I asked, "What is your secret 'Of happiness?" He said, "My son, the secret 'Of your happiness is mDderation, whether it be deep in the arms of Bacchus or thDse of a pretty lady. My son, never 000 much; on the other hand, my SDn, never tOD little". That is the way I try tD do it, sDmetimes unsuccessfully, but sometimes reaSDnably successfully. Mr. President, I thought you were about tD give me some advice.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett): I will give Mr. ElIiDt my advice 'Outside.

The HDn. D. G. ELLIOT: I will wait upon you for it. I have an English air ab 'Out me sometimes.

The PRESIDENT: I wDuld like YDU to have the Bill about you.

The HDn. D. G. ELLIOT: The Bill itself has an old English air about it. The Englishmen lDve their ale and

858 Business Franchise [COUNCIL.] (Tobacco) Bill.

tobacco also. Some great Englishmen certainly indulged. The Opposition does not oppose this measure, but $20 million is a sizeable amount when one adds to that the very high excise duty imposed on tobacco nowadays. I wish to comment on the fact that now the licence fee is to be converted to a monthly payment of $10, instead of a payment of $100 a year. This means that the licence fee will be $120, an increase of 20 per cent. This Government is getting rather professional in its approach to fund-raising.

This measure worries me in one regard. In his second-reading speech the Minister made reference to intrastate trading of wholesale tobacco merchants, and it is quite clear that the trading percentage payment shall be on trading that takes place solely intrastate, that is, within the State. The Minister said-

The monthly fee will be $10, plus an amount equivalent to 10 per cent intrastate sales--other than sales to another licensed wholesaler or group of wholesalers.

That means if a wholesaler sells to another wholesaler, his goods will not be subject to sales tax until they are passed on to a retail outlet. What if the company is formed in New South Wales and purchases tobacco grown on the northern tablelands around Inverell-there is a big production quota which comes from there -and uses that tobacco, plus whatever can be imported from Virginia or elsewhere in America, or Rhodesia -although we would not be doing that officially at the moment-and produces a product which I will not name at this juncture as it is not necessary? Then under section 92 of the Constitution he transports that product from New South Wales to Victoria. What would be the situation where a sale is made on an interstate rather than an intrastate basis as far as percentage of turnover is concerned, and the licence fee?

I would be most interested to hear from the Minister on this matter. I know that the Government will be

The Hon. D. G. Elliot.

receiving lioence fees from 'most companies, plus a percentage of turnover, as part of that licence accreditation would be of a national nature. However, there are companies in New South Wales and Victoria which do not exist in other States, and a company in New South Wales may want to do business with a compan.v in Victoria on an interstate basis and seek protection under section 92 of the Constitution.

I might add in the interests of the Government that this has been exploited very fully in the liquor industry. Semi-trailer after semi-trailer is seen loaded with wine coming from Renmark or the Barossa Valley, where it is bought at the winery and transported to Victoria where the 8 per cent liquor tax is not required, and it is sold straight to the consumer with a consequent saving to the retailer. How would this apply in the tobacco industry? I cannot see an explanation for it in the Minister's notes.

The Hon. H. M. HAMILTON: It is covered in the parent Act.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: I would be grateful if the Minister would point it out. As I read the Minister's notes, plus the measure before the House, I find it difficult to see how section 92 could be interpreted in any other way than that trading oould take place unimpeded. It already happens with liquor-why not tobacco, unless there is something specified in the Bill? How would this apply to a person trading in another State and who consigns to Victoria? Mr. Hamilton says that it is covered in the Act, but I should like to know where it is covered. I shall withdraw my reference to it if the Minister can point this out to me.

The Hon. H. M. HAMILTON: It provides for a licence fee.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: I shall wait for the Minister's comments. I appreciate Mr. Hamilton bringing it to my attention. The Opposition has no objection to the Bill. As I said at the outset, the Government has to


raise money somehow. I do not know whether the Minister handling the Bill is a smoker, but he has a couple of pleasant vices.

The PRESIDENT (Sir Raymond Garrett): The Bill covers only one vice.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: Yes, that is so. I am only mentioning the others in passing because I think the same principle, particuhnly in relation to liquor, applies. Maybe I am wrong. I look forward to hearing from the Minister in that regard.

The Hon. S. R. McDONALD (Northern Province): In rising to support this Bill, I say at the outset that I do not profess to have Mr. Elliot's experience in what he termed the "pleasant vices". I certainly respect his reputation. The purpose of the Bill, as the Minister pointed out, is to close a loophole that has become apparent in the legislation that was passed by this Parliament twe> years ago. The principal Act is the Business Franchise (Tobacco) Act 1974. This was passed as a means of raising revenue, and it was a Budget measure. Since then, as the Minister outlined, some loopholes have become apparent. One relates to wholesalers wishing to evade or decrease the amount of tax which they would otherwise pay.

I do not intend to go through the Bill in detail except to say that the National Party supports the principle embodied in it. The National Party believes if the original purpose of the principal Act is not being met, and there is a loophole, it should be rectified.

The Minister stated that the Prices Justification Tribunal sanctioned the inclusion of this 10 per cent of intrastate sales in the wholesale price of tobacco. This means under the Bill that the tobacco wholesaler would in effect be paying a tax on a tax. In clause 3 (d) (ii) provision is made to reduce the value of the gross sales of every merchant by ten-elevenths. The liquor industry has complained

f'Or many years that a liquor licence fee or hotel licence fees are based on total revenue or gross sales, and this includes excise which is imposed by the Commonwealth.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: And the cost of the container, strange as it may seem, which I think is an anomaly.

The Hon. S. R. McDONALD: I am grateful for Mr. Elliot's assistance, but I think the Government should consider whether or not there is a need or justification to extend the same principle included in clause 3 (d) (ii) for the benefit of the tobacco wholesaler. The Government should extend the samle principle to the licensees in the liquor trade. With those remarks I indicate that my party supports the Bill.


and committed.



The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary) : This evening one or two matters have been raised in debate. Mr. ElIiot referred to fees for licences and how they relate to intrastate and interstate sales. Mr. McDonald also raised a point. As this is a Budget Bill I thought my Treasury advisers might have been sitting behind me to provide the answers to any queries. As they are not, and as there is still time for this Bill to be passed through the House tomorrow, I am prepared at this stage to report progress and consider the matters which have been raised.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT (Melbourne Province) : I did not wish to press the Minister to that extent. I raised a point which I thought could lose this Government a considerable amount of money. It is good business to investigate whether one could acquire more money for re-


venue purposes. Mr. Hamilton said the body of the Bill contained an answer and maybe it does, but it may be more difficult than one thinks. I appreciate the Minister's gesture but the Labor Party does not necessarily require that step to be taken.

Progress was reported.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH. ADDRESS-IN -REPLY.

The debate (adjourned from May 4) on the motion of the Hon. P. D. Block (Boronia Province) for the adoption of an Address-in-Reply to the Governor's Speech was resumed.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT (Melbourne Province) : I am pleased that the Minister for State Development and Decentralization and Minister of Tourism is in the House tonight becaus'e my main remarks will be beamed at him in a spirit of cooperation with suggestions that I believe are worthy of adoption in the field of tourism in Victoria.

Before I launch into those suggestions I wish to comment on the Address given by His Excellency, Sir Henry Winneke. When I first became a member of this House, certain honorable members whom I shall not nam1e suggested strongly to me that I should rise and speak my piece and having done so sit down with none of the frills and flounces tha t are expected, particularly from members of the Government party and from the corner party. However, in this instance I wish to make a remark about Sir Henry Winneke, the Governor of Victoria. I have been a member of this Parliament for sixteen years and, apart from the content of the Address which is written for the Governor by the Government, I have never heard in this House, a finer rendition of the Address than that made by Sir Henry at the opening of Parliament after the recent election. Honorable members may agree or disagree. Some good efforts have been made but

none better than that of Sir Henry. At a time when there is some argument throughout the Br~tish Commonwealth as to the necessity for Queen's representatives; Sir Henry Winneke graces his positipn and adds to it by the fact that he is an Australian and further by the fact that he is a great Victorian. I pay tribute to him. Frankly, in one word I think he is a toff.

I now turn to the subject of tourism, which, as the Minister for State Development and Decentralization and of Tourism knows, is close to my heart. In recent years I have had the opportunity and privilege of visiting quite a few areas in Victoria and southern New South Wales. One fact has emerged clearly to me and I am sure to thousands of Victorians - it is about time the official outlets of the Victorian Government through the Victorian Government Tourist Bureau, Victour, for the purpose of selling tourism not only in Victoria but interstate and overseas were updated. In Victoria, there are a few branches of Victour. I say kindly but purposefully that they deserve revitalizing in some form.

Perhaps the greatest insult that could have been offered to the Victorian Government Tourist Bureau occurred about twelve or fifteen months ago when the State Savings Bank signified its intention--most belatedly, but nonetheless welcometo enter into the tourist business. It is natural that a bank should handle tourism for its customers. At that time, with the full knowledge of the Honorable Murray Byrne, I did my best to persuade the State Savings Bank to co-operate with Victour in the promotion of tourism within the bank. The bank conducted an exhaustive survey on the tourist bureau and concluded that it would be disastrous for it to do business with Victour. If the Minister doubts this he can check with the State Bank. As a member


of Parliament, I found the attitude of the State Savings Bank towards Victour a personal insult and in spite of the fact that I did my best to persuade the powers that be there-I had a lot to do with that bank in the past and represented it on television for three and a half years-my efforts were to n'O avail. There must have been some reason for this.

I am not saying that the vast majority of people who work for Victour are not earnest in their endeavours and willing to go out of their way to help one but the image is lacking and if the Minister doubts what I am saying, he has only to ask questions of the consumer.

Without mentioning personalities, I point out that it is rather ironical that a magnificent advertising campaign has been presented for the Ministry of Tourism by Foote, Cone and Belding Pty. Ltd., the advertising agents of the Ministry, and has been put into operation with the slogan "Victoria-all it needs is you" , selling region by region throughout Victoria with thoroughly professionally produced advertisements which have produced a great demand for the travel guides applicable to that region, but little or no effort has been made by Victour to produce a contact for immediate business. There is an old saying in advertising that if one cannot produce a cash flow there is something wrong with the advertising. When people are not given pointedly in advertising a medium of contact to do something immediately from a tourist point of view regarding their own State, it is time something was done.

A beautiful campaign has been created to sell the south-west of Victoria. However, if one goes to the south-west along the Great Ocean Road, as the Minister of Tourism and probably every other member of this House has done, through Anglesea and Lome, it is impossible to find many first-class beds. There may be one or two at the Lorne Hotel but

nowhere else. If one continues on to Apollo Bay and Port Campbell one has the same experience. Until one reaches Warmambool it is almost impossible to find first-class accommodation. Port Campbell is a beautiful place. There is a nice little motel at Peterborough with excellent accommodation which I have visited. However, when one is spending money as the Government through the Minister of Tourism is doing at present on a specific area, the cart is being put before the horse in not making certain that accommodation is available for all types of income earners in the area. Further, provision should be made for the "impulse buy" to be followed up and translated into cash going into the Victorian Government Tourist Bureau.

Before I say anything more in criticism, I should say something in favour of Victour. Today, in travel, so many people are being fleeced of their money with dishonest advertising and just as dishonest follow ups that they are looking more than ever to organizations and firms that they can trust. There would be no doubt that the average consumer believes that even though he would not receive the best of service from Victour he certainly could trust what Victour sold him.

The Hon. 1. A. SWINBURNE: They give a good service too!

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: Mr. Swinburne obtains that service as he has stated before, but he is speaking as a member of Parliament. I speak as a member of Parliament and I have been treated excellently by the Victorian Government Tourist Bureau. However, one must be fair. Most of the operators there who have reached any form of proficiency and care in their work are soon snapped up by the pastoral houses, travel agents or by the banks. They go elsewhere and are offered the impetus to do so. Although there is a movement in the right direction, not enough personnel from Victour

862 Governor's Speech: [COUNCIL.] Address-In-Reply.

are going interstate and overseas to experience conditions, accommodation and so forth, in other places.

There is no doubt that when a person goes in to see a representative at Victour, that person should be handled as promptly as possible and if he cannot be handled promptly he should be greeted, put into a comfortable chair, given a magazine or two or three brochures and informed that it will not be long before individual and exclusive attention is given to him. This does not happen often enough in Victour.

Economically Victorians are trying to find more value than hitherto in tourism within their own State. There is a good reason for that. It is expensive to travel today. To go to Surfers Paradise to days costs a fortune. The people at Surfers Paradise are getting over that to a certain extent by providing magnificent package deals which include accommodation. Victoria has a challenge in the field of tourism that it should rise to meet as never before. It must persuade Victorian people to spend their leisure time within their own State. Victoria is a four-seasons State. It contains wonderful alpine country and there is a potential of 52 weeks of sunshine in Mildura. From Swan Hill down the mighty River Murray it is second to none; it is magnificent. If Victoria wishes to get together with South Australia, Renmark could be included in package deals.

I hasten to say that, through great work by Mr. Bill Moran and his staff, the present director of tourism, we have had an enthusiastic response to what is called week-end and four or five day holiday propositions in various areas throughout Victoria. The formation of regional tourist authorities has been enhanced somewhat by the fact that people can call on these authorities when they are passing through and obtain further help if they require it. The big problem today is that regional tour-

The Hon. D. G. Elliot.

ist authorities are costing a lot of money and they have no 'cash flow whatsoever.

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER;': The honorable member is implying that they confer no benefit on a region.

The Hon. D. G. ELL10T: I did not say that. I enjoyed the 'Minister's speech and thought it was the best he had ever made in this House. I ask him to listen to me carefully; he is completely out of line. I said that regional tourist authorities are not enjoying any cash flow. By that I did not suggest in any way that they are not doing a good job. In fact, having seen and spoken to most of the personnel, I assure honorable members that they are dedicated people. The vast majority of them are keen to do more. They would like to put more into their endeavours so that they could produce some cash flow. They can produce that cash flow if they are made agents of the Victorian Government Tourist Bureau. They should have all the pamphlets~everything they ask for, not just for their own region but for all of Victoria, interstate and overseas. They can hand out brochures which are duly stamped by the local authority so that when the deal is consummated by Victour they get a percentage of the commission. This would create some sort of cash flow. I have not yet encountered one of them who would not embrace enthusiastically this prospect as part of the service to the community.

I was not implying that they are not doing anything for people who see them. I am saying that they want to do more. They should be given the opportunity to do infinitely more than they are doing at present. I know that they hand out brochures, are nice to people and so on. They are present all day. They can handle with the utmost ease any inquiry about travel in Victoria, interstate or overseas. If the Minister wants any help in that direction I shall forget politics and help him as I did


his predecessor because I love tourism. I believe Victoria is almost virgin territory in its potential.

I know that money is short. That is one of the main reasons why the regional tourist authorities should be given the privilege of creating some form of income for themselves. Also there is insufficient representation of Victour throughout Victoria, so something must be done about the matter. The ideal situation would be to use the 1,000-odd outlets, either in branches or agencies possessed by the State Bank of Victoria. But because of its survey the bank refused to have anything to do with the Government. Despite any pressure that was exerted, a deal was worked out with Thomas Cook Pty. Ltd. That is a real slap in the face. That should be a priority job for rectification by the new Minister of Tourism.

There could be alternatives in this regard, such as post offices or selected businesses in towns. There should be at least 100 to 150 agents for the Victorian Government Tourist Bureau throughout Victoria. It does not matter how many agents there are. It would be a handy piece of loose change for these people if they were able to persuade someone in Manangatang, Rochester, Shepparton, Beechworth or wherever it may be that he should travel under the auspices of Victour. It would mean more money for the Government's coffers, so everybody would be happy. Incidentally, the consumer would be happy also because he would trust his Government with respect to tourism. Add to that keenly placed advertising support along the lines of "You can trust your Government "; "We not only have know-how, but you can trust us "; U You are in safe hands ". or whatever one wants to say. If this is persevered with for long enough, people will accept that it is natural for them to arrange their travel through their Government agency.

I am not trying to condemn the Public Service, but there is an atmosphere of eternity at times in the Public Service. It is all right to adopt that attitude in certain branches but basically I do not agree with it. In tourism one is on a tight-rope. If it was a private undertaking and a person could not produce, he would be out of business, and that is fair enough. If the Government accepts this challenge in a virile and purposeful fashion, in two or three years time it will have a handsome sum for the Consolidated Fund to use as it sees fit. I strongly suggest that it should be ploughed back into tourism. Perhaps some means can be organized whereby a Iow-income earner can get away with his family on a cheap but good holiday within Victoria. It is a glorious challenge. As I said, I am looking at this not so much from a political viewpoint as from that of a person who loves his State and his country.

Over the past three years we have been categorizing areas throughout Victoria and have inquired what first-class average motel accommodation is available at a commensurate price, what accommodation is available at private homes and guesthouses, and how willing local bowling clubs and golf clubs are ID welcome visitors. Also we wish to ascertain whether the bowling clubs and golf clubs have licensing facilities, what general tourist attractions exist in a particular zone and what it would cost the average breadwinner to visit that area for a period of either less than one week or more than one week with his wife and perhaps two children. We found that the cost is too high for the average wage earner but not so for the medium wage earner.

Most attractive propositions are available in areas that are prepared to get together and make concessions to attract visitors. What people spend in the hotel frequently


is only a fraction of what they spend over the entire period in that holiday zone.

I am quite prepared to offer what advice and what facts I have to the Minister if he is interested, as I am sure he is. A person could visit a place somewhere in the Minister's area. At Ararat and Stawell a person can stay for a fortnight and enjoy every day, and do it at reasonable cost. The Pyrenees before Ararat are virtually unexplored by Victorians. It is amazing how many people do not bother to go there. If one turns to the right off the Western Highway before Ararat, one can enter paradise. At Ararat there is a pleasant journey into history. There is a beautiful golf course and a wonderful bowling green. From Stawell one can go over to Halls Gap and the Victoria Valley and come out at Dunkeld. There is much to do in an area that is virtually unexplored. Halls Gap is a magnificent area which is overdue for a king hit. Not enough people go there.

The Hon. G. J. NICOL: That is why it is a beautiful area.

The Hon. D. G. ELLIOT: I have heard that said quite frequently and I have heard Mr. Swinburne suggest that some national parks should not be open to the public. There are 2·5 million people in Melbourne and about 3·2 million people in Victoria. Something must happen to keep these people reasonably well occupied when they have a week or so to spend as families. Fewer than 37 per cent or 38 per cent of the people go on holidays for more than a week each year and only 52 per cent go for periods of up to one week. It is an irrefutable fact that 85 per cent of people travel by car if they wish to go somewhere.

Therein lies Victoria's challenge. One can attract people to virtually any part of Victoria-South Gippsland, East Gippsland and the southwest, even though limited accommodation is available, could be ex-

plored. People could have a lot of fun travelling by the Sunraysia Highway through Ballarat, Avoca and St. Arnaud until they finally reach Mildura. It is a fascinating trip back along the Murray Valley Highway. At Maldon and Dunolly there are wonderful journeys to be taken back into time. This is Mr. Grimwade's area. A person can spend a week between Dunolly and Linton and cannot help being absolutely fascinated every day of the week by the journey back into time and meeting charming people who can remember the early days.

There are good facilities in many areas. Consider what Ballarat has done with Sovereign Hill and Kryal Castle. There are beautiful areas such as the botanic gardens, Dowling Forest racecourse and the city of Ballarat itself which offers first-class accommodation up to world standard. This attracts people who can have a good night.'s rest in good accommodation with good meals. There are definite attractions in that area.

It is a great challenge. I have wandered a little in my recommendations to the Government, but I sincerely hope the Minister will see fit to utilize what members of the Opposition can offer so that Victour will be used infinitely more by Victorians when they go on holidays.

The Hon. I. A. SWINBURNE (North-Eastern Province): This is the last occasion on which I shall be able to take part in an Address-in-Reply debate. Once again I wish to express my loyalty to Her Majesty the Queen. The people of Victoria and of Australia are looking forward to her visit to Australia next year.

I express my great appreciation and thanks to His Excellency the Governor, Sir Henry Winneke, and his good lady for the hospitality and the friendliness they have extended and for the way in which they have carried out their responsibilities in this State. Victoria has had many Governors during my term as a member of this House, but


Sir Henry Winneke is the first native-born Governor of the State. He has carried out a difficult job with great credit to himself and to the State as a whole. Those of us who have met him on various occasions, not only at Government House but also at functions in Melbourne and throughout the State, have always appreciated his friendly manner. I record my loyalty to Her Majesty the Queen and to her representative in Victoria.

I wish to raise two matters of the utm'Ost importance t'O Victoria. The first is a problem which faces not only the legal fraternity but als'o the "John Citizens ", and I refer to keeping abreast with the statutes of this State. In about 1958 a new system of running consolidation of the statutes was begun. As 'One who has made some contribution to dealing with Bills in this Chamber over many years, I believe that a halt must now be called S'O that a serious look can be taken at the system 'Of running consolida tion.

The worthy new Attorney-General who has just taken over the position is qualified to conduct investigations through the Law Department into how this scheme is proceeding. Over the years I have found it difficult to keep up with the masses of amendments that are passed through the House. Every session Bills are passed and amendments are made to them in the following session. Unf'Ortunately for all honorable members only one set of statutes in the whole Parliament is kept up to date from day to day.

The statutes on the table of the Chamber are sometimes up to six months out 'Of date. This causes difficulties for members in far-flung parts of the State where the statutes have not been kept up to date, because they have t'O come to Melbourne to try to work out what the statutes contain and where the amendments fit into the complex pattern. The problem involves two or three major

areas of which I shall mention only a few, although I could speak 'On them at length.

There are various ways in which statutes are proclaimed 'Or given the Royal assent. The Local Government (Rates) Amendment Bill, which is before the House at present, contains the following provision-

The special provisions of this Act shall come into operation on the day or the respective days to be fixed by proclamation or successive proclamations of the Governor-inCouncil published in the Government Gazette.

A member must keep abreast of every step to carry through a study of the statutes. The Government Gazette 'Of 5th M-ay contains a proclamati'On 'Of sections 7, 8 and 9 of the Social Welfare (Amendment) Act 1975, No. 8701. It als'O contains a notice proclaiming that section 23 of the Social Welfare Act 1973, No. 8493, shall come into 'operation on 5th May, and a further proclamation that section 8 of the Social Welfare (Amendment) Act 1973, N'O. 8426, shall come into operation on 5th May. It is complicated for the average 'Citizen 'Or member 'Of this House to keep tabs on which Bills have been proclaimed and which have received Royal assent. I know that each day when the House meets, y'Ou, Mr. President, read 'Out a list of such Bills, and there should be a way 'Of storing that informati'On obtained frDm the various publications of the proceedings of this Chamber. H'Onorable members are apt to put things away in filing cabinets, and they are hard to find when they are needed.

A system should be established to list the Bills which have not been proclaimed. Some Bills have been on the statute-book for many years and have never been proclaimed, and I do not suppose they ever will be. Other measures have been extensively amended, and some of their original provisions will never be proclaimed. The statutes are written up as they go through the House, but when amendments are inserted honorablemembers 'Ought to be able


to ascertain which Acts have been proclaimed and understand the effects that amendments will have on them.

As one who has tried to make a contribution to discussions of amendments before the House over the years, I believe it is important to have this information when making a reasoned contribution to the debates. Through you, Mr. President, I suggest that the Attorney-General could authorize an officer in his department --he has a competent officer who could do this-to draw up a list of statutes and insert amendments in them as they are made. In this way members would have access to the list and would know what portions of Acts have not been proclaimed. This could be done so that at the end of each session 'members would know what they were trying to amend. Sometimes a Bill is passed in one session and amended in the following session as a result of suggestions made by hon'Orable members or departments. This must be carried on, but members need to know which Acts have not been proclaimed.

These days power is being increasingly delegated by regulation to subordinate legislation. I was 'one 'Of the original members of the Subordinate Legislation Committee established by the then Attorney-General, the late Sir Arthur Rylah, to supervise regulations that go through to the various departments from the statutes. Members of the committee were custodians of the statutes and regulations that flowed from them. I served on the committee for many years and returned five or six years ago to serve on it until the recentelecti'On. More difficulties are occurring because of the introduction of that type 'Of regulati'On. For example, a secti'On of the Health Act gives a certain power and then it adds the words-

and all other powers thus enabling. That is a wide phrase. Members of the Subordinate Legislation Committee must consult the Acts Interpretation Act and other Acts to ascertain whether complementary legislati'On which might have given a power at

The Hon. I. A. Swinbume.

some time has been enacted. It is necessary to have power to make regulations, but apart from members of the Subordinate Legislation Committee, not many members take notice of the weekly bundle of regulations that they receive. Unless a member studied th1e regulations correctly, he would not know what they meant anyway.

The matter has been handed over to a committee for consideration, but some of the suggestions put forward in various reports that the committee has presented to the House from time to time should be examined. I refer particularly to the rep'ort of 1969-70 by the Subordinate Legislation Committee, which was presented after many years of research. It extended throughout the lives of two committees, and the report contains a number of recommendations and conclusions. Some have been implemented, but quite a number have not, and these matters are vital to the work of the committee in supervising regulations. I ask the Attorney-General to consider these reports-there are quite a number of them-to ascertain whether some of the recommendations of the committee could be implemented.

The Marine (Amendment) Bill which is presently before the House provides for extensive powers to be given by regulation. Eventually these regulations have to be policed and the Subordinate Legislation Committee will have t'O determine whether they are right or wrong. It is time this matter was examined. The new Attorney-General has a fresh approach, and I should like him to look at the provisions and principles laid down by Sir Arthur Rylah when he set up the Subordinate Legislation Committee. ,More attention should be paid to the end use of the statutes and the subordinate powers that flow from them.

There are books of regulations, some of which are redundant or have been amended, and it is difficult to follow them through. If a person asked a member of the legal fraternity what the law was in relation to


a certain matter, it would take the legal adviser some time to resolve everything contained in the statutes and the regulations dealing with them. I ask the Attorney-General to do something about this so that honorable members can understand what the law is in Victoria. If they know that it will help them in the House and \vill also assist solicitors, barristers and judges in the courts.

Recently I read a newspaper article which quoted a member of the legal fraternity as stating that not only barristers and solicitors but also judges were doubtful about the interpretation of some Acts and regulations flowing from them.

The second matter I wish to raise comes under the jurisdiction of the Chief Secretary. I refer to the problems of the motorist and the pedestrian. In Victoria two systems of traffic control exist but they are united or co-ordinated. One system is called Metcon and the other is called Statcon. The first system applies in themetropolitan area, and the second applies on country roads in Victoria.

When the matter was first brought forward, the idea was to proclaim priority roads and that people would have to give way to those priority roads. This system is working effectively in the city. A man who comes from the country and drives in the city has some protection and knows what he is doing, but once he drives past the outskirts of Broadmeadows on the Hume Highway he is at the mercy of the give-way-to-the-right rule. A State highway runs between Melbourne and Wodonga and passes through a number of major towns and cities on the way to the border. I believe the sooner the Princes Highway, the Western Highway and the Hume Highway are made priority roads, the sooner the stage will be reached where a major contribution will be made to the safety of the people who use them.

It is said that a person must give way, but it is very dangerous to do so. Recently I had a few narrow

escapes in which the interpretation of this law had a serious effect. When one travels up the highway and somebody wants to claim their right of way, one has to quickly assess whether there is a 20-ton truck at the back of one's car. A person has the choice of stopping or of breaking the law. If a policeman happens to be following, he can charge a person for failing to give way to the right.

Recently during the opening of the duck season I travelled to Melbourne and back in onle day. On the way home I drove through Benalla. The police had booked the duck shooters who had unregistered guns and who had consumed too much liquor, and so on, and the police were wandering around the city of BenalIa wondering what to do with themselves. They decided to have a blitz on everyone who failed to give way to the right. They had no trouble in catching 30 or 40 people in one afternoon because most country people have reached the stage where they give courtesy to the highway itself. The principle has been established in most country towns that the highway is a priority road. Few people cross the highway if the traffic is busy, but odd ones will attempt to beat it. They claim their right because there are no stop or give-way signs. It cost me $45 to learn that the highway is not a priority road and that I had no right of way. Many people w'ere caught in the same way. I had a yarn with the local police about the matter and I joked about being caught. They said that under no circumstances would they book anyone under that principle. The officers who booked me were from Russell Street, and they said it was the law and they had to implement it. I told them to do their duty and I would pay the fine.

This week when I came into Benalla a gravel truck came in on my right and appeared to be going to exercise its right of way, so I pulled up, remembering my previous experience. Three cars which were following me flew past between me and the


truck. Eventually, in desperation the truck driver waved me through. This problem on the State highways should be straightened out. The sooner the Statcon system is implemented, the better it will be for country drivers. Apparently in New South Wales the highway is accepted as a priority road, and interstate drivers from New South Wales claim that right in Victoria.

The Hon. K. S. GROSS: So do South Australians.

The Hon. I. A. SWINBURNE: That is correct. This is causing a great deal of concern. The sooner the matter is implemented on some uniform basis, the better it will be for the people of Victoria. I hope the Chief Secretary will take up this matter. I have had a discussion with him and I believe it should be attended to in the interests of safety.

When I was apprehended on the first occasion I had a remarkable experience. There was apparently a convoy of twelve panel vans. I do not know what they represented, but they caught up with me on the south side of Benalla and insisted on passing me in convoy. One of them actually cut somebody off, but they went through in convoy and broke the law because they were doing approximately 45 miles an hour in a limited zone. I was the poor fellow left at the tail end of the line when they had all gone by. I was doing about 20 miles an hour because they had slowed me down to such an extent that I was crawling along. However, I was left at the tail end and they all proceeded on their merry way.

On the sec'Ond 'Occasion when I had a truck breathing down my back with a 20-ton load on it, I either had to accept the principle that I was caught or let the truck go through me. I decided that in the interests of the safety of the family, whom I had in the car, I should take the risk of being caught, and that is what happened. This week when the three people decided to pass me

after I had extended the courtesy of giving way to the right, it proved to me that people believe it is a priority road. It is not a priority road, and neither are the other State highways. Certain streets are given priority because they have bullet, stop or give-way signs, but in the interests of safety in the State the Government should adopt the principle of declaring the State highways as priority roads and ensuring that this is done at the earliest possible opportunity.

The Hon. R. J. LONG (Gippsland Province): I support the motion for the adoption of an Address-in-Reply so ably moved and seconded by my colleagues, Mr. Block and Mr. Haddon Storey. I affirm my loyalty and the loyalty lof the great majority of the electors in Gippsland Province to Her Majesty the Queen. I adopt and endorse the remarks of Mr. Elliot and Mr. Swinbume about His Excellency the Governor. I believe he and Lady Winneke are doing a magnificent job.

In case I do not get another opportunity, at this stage I should like to say how sorry I am that my colleague and friend, Mr. Eric Kent, will be leaving this House. I have enjoyed his companionship, and I thank him for the work he has done for Gippsland Province. I am certain my colleagues on the Government side of the House will agree with me that we have enjoyed his contributions to debates in this Chamber. We will all be the losers when he departs.

Mr. Gleeson, when referring to education, said that many people regard education as a means for correcting inequality and for bringing about egalitarianism. He went on to say how wrong that was. I enjoyed his speech, and I thought it was interesting because many people seem to think that education brings about equality. Obviously all it brings about is equality of opportunity.

For some time I have been concerned about the higher school certificate e~amination. I know the present indications are that it wiIJ

Governor's Speech : [12 MAY, 19'76.] A ddress-in-Reply. 869

probably be altered in 1978, but it seems totally wrong that the future of a student is determined by one examination. That can have tremendous repercussions on the student. Honorable members who have done examinations know that sometimes it is just not one's day. A person may not be feeling well and there may be many reasons why he is not at his best to compete on that day. Nevertheless, we adopt a system that relies entirely on that one examination to determine the future of Victorian students. I have said for a long time that it is wrong.

The Hon. I. A. SWINBURNE: It is a measuring stick.

The Hon. R. J. LONG: Yes, and it is wrong. The problem could be easily overcome. The schools could carry out examinations perhaps once or twice a year and the teachers could report on the students. That might be much fairer. It would only become applicable to students on the border line as to whether they passed or failed. Before the examiners actually fail the student doing the higher school certificate course they should look at the earlier examination results and the teacher's report and take all those factors into account in assessing whether the student should fail. That at least gives the student a better opportunity, and the examiner has a better opportunity of assessing whether the student should be passed and perhaps prevent the ruining of the life of a young person.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: If he completed a satisfactory year, rather than simply passing that examination?

The Hon. R. J. LONG: Yes, because honorable members will agree that some people are very good at examinations and they may not do any work.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPBELL: Some teachers have pet students, too.

The Hon. R. J. LONG: That is true, but over-all the examiner would get a better picture than relying on that one examination.

That brings me to the second matter of concern in the present education system in Victoria. Children are expected at the age of eleven or twelve years to decide whether they should pursue their education in a high school or a technical school. That is an impossible situation because 99·9 per cent of the time a parent who is not qualified to make the decision is doing so on behalf of the child. Naturally they probably do their best, but they may have no idea of the trends that the student is exhibiting in his school career. For some time I have maintained that we should have what I call a higher school. At the age of eleven or twelve years the child should go to a higher school for perhaps three years and at the end of that time he or she might be in a slightly better positi'on-I emphasize the word " slightly tt-to assess whether he or she should pursue a course at a high school or a technical school. I fail to see how a child can decide that question at eleven or twelve years of age.

I pass to a few matters concerning decentralization. Perhaps I could take the opportunity of paying a compliment to Mr. Crozier's predecessor as Minister for State Development and Decentralization, the Honorable Murray Byme, who did a fantastically good job for decentralization. Perhaps I could put it this way: Mr. Byrne put decentralization on the map in Victoria. He was the right man at the right time in the right place. It is interesting to reflect that he received much criticism while he was the Minister, but as soon as he announced his retirement everyone spoke of what a wonderful job he had done. I suppose that is understandable. When a person decides to retire, people assess the job he has done and in this case they have rightly concluded that Mr. Byrne was successful.

I have a couple of small but important suggestions to make, even though they may not be within the


ambit of the present Minister for State Development and Decentralization. One thing which has irked me for many years is the practice of the Country Roads Board in employing Melbourne solicitors on country matters. The State Motor Car Insurance Office has changed its policy and now employs country solicitors. I am irritated every time I see a report that, in relation to a country matter, the Country Roads Board will instruct a solicitor in St. Kilda to carry out legal work. This is a small matter but country solicitors could properly be used for this work.

A similar situation applies in the Supreme Court. Country solicitors must employ Melbourne solicitors to file documents in the Supreme Court, and this adds to costs. If there is one thing in which we should all be interested today, it is cost. We should reduce costs in any way we can. There is no reason why documents which must be filed in the Supreme Court cannot be sent to the court and filed. The worst the officers of the court could say is that that would be inconvenient or difficult; it is not impossible. This practice should be adopted. If it were it would provide a service to country people. We must keep as many country people in the country as we possibly can and we must keep their solicitors' fees as low as possible.

I am concerned that a minority in the community can stop such a project as the Newport power station.

The Hon. W. M. CAMPB'ELL: It is 153 people out of 3 million.

The Hon. R. J. LONG: It is not 153 people. We all know the history of Newport. Some people are saying that they are worried about the environmental position, but they are also saying that they are worried about the use of natural gas in such a power station and stating that it would be a waste of a natural resource. However, it seems to me to be perfectly clear that the people concerned would agree to a power station using natural gas being built

somewhere else. What can we do when a few people stop such a project?

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: You are a member of the Government party.

The Hon. R. J. LONG: Members of my party form the Government, but how can we build a power station when the unions will not allow their members to work on it ?

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: A lot more than 153 people are involved.

The Hon. R. J. LONG: I did not say there were 153 people concerned; that figure was put to me. The same thing has happened in England. The unions took over and ruined the country. Victoria could be ruined unless somebody takes action. I appeal to the rank and file unionists, who, I believe, are honest and sincere fellows wanting to do a job, not to be led by the nose by union leaders who are not concerned about Victoria, but only about their own power struggle.

Mr. Gallagher was successful in ensuring that the Regent theatre would be retained, but the question I raise is who will keep it going and pay for its upkeep. Where can we find the money for its maintenance? Possibly in a short space of time, it will be an ornament.

The Hon. G. J. NICOL: Why not just let it rot?

The Hon. R. J. LONG: That would take a while and it would be an eyesore in the meantime.

Let us face facts. The Communists in the trade union movement are not interested in the welfare of people. They are interested only in creating chaos, in caring for themselves, and in seeking power. Therefore, the ordinary, common or garden unionist whom we all know, respect and admire must at some stage stand up and say he has had enough. When he does that and gets rid of the fellows playing the power-grabbing game, we might get somewhere.

The Hon. J. M. TRIPOVICH: Would you name some of the Communists?


The Hon. R. J. LONG: They are well known to Mr. Tripovich and I do not have to name them here. The position was well summed up by the Age in an editorial on 10th May. Like many other people I believe the Age has been doing a wonderfully good service for Victoria over the past few months. In speaking about the Newport power station situation, the leading article says, inter alia-

The ultimate losers are the people of Victoria. It is possible that they have been saved a small increase in air pollution over Melbourne. But at what a price. Resiting the power station will cost at least $100 million and much more if the union ban is extended to the use of natural gas elsewhere. For this, all electricity users can expect to pay in higher charges. And the delay could well mean -if State Electricity Commission projections of demand are correct - power shortages, with restrictions and possible unemployment. That is the probable economic cost of this protracted power struggle. More serious, perhaps, is the political cost. The authority of the legitimate Government of this State has been usurped by a militant, stubborn group of trade unions and what may flow on from this is little short of frightening.

I concur wholeheartedly in those comments. It is strange that people should be complaining about unemployment when, at Newport, employment could be providedl for a great number of people.

On the motion of the Hon. K. S. GROSS (Western Province), the debate was adjourned.




SUNSHINE AND DEER PARK WEST RAIL LINK.

(Question No. 29)

The Hon. H. A. THOMAS (Melbourne West Province) asked the Minister for State Development and Decentralization, for the Minister of Transpo rt-

(a) Has work ceased on the construction of a rail service between Sunshine and Deer Park West; if so, why?

(b) When will work recommence? (c) What are the expected dates of com

pletion of the project and the commencement of the rail service?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister for State Development and Decentralization): The answer supplied by the Miuister of Transport is-

(a) and (b) Duplication of the trackwork between Sunshine and Deer Park West has been completed-work is still in progress in connection with the provision of power signalling on this section of track.

( c) It is expected that the prOvision of power signalling will be completed by the end of July this year.

Details of the commencement of the rail service on this line have not yet been finalized.

ROAD GRANTS FOR HORSHAM AREA.

(Question No. 56) The Hon. K. I. WRIGHT (North

Western Province) asked the Minister for State Development and Decentralization, for the Minister of Transport-

(a) Have municipal councils in the Horsham division of the Country Roads Board been advised within the past week of further additional grants; if so, how much has been allocated to each council, and for what purpose?

(b) From what sources have these grants been obtained?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister for State Development and Decentralization) : The answer supplied by the Minister of Transport is-

(a) and (b) The Country Roads Board has not advised councils in the Horsham division of further additional grants.

PROPOSED SUNSHINE HOSPITAL. (Question No. 69)

The Hon. H. A. THOMAS (Melbourne West Province) asked the Minister of Health-

What are the reasons for the delav in the commencement of construction of the proposed Sunshine hospital?

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health): The answer is-

There has been no delay in the commencement of this complex project. A joint planning organization has been established and sketch plans for the first stage have been completed.


It is expected that a preliminary excavation contract will commence within a few weeks and that construction of the first stage will be completed in about eighteen months.

Other stages of the project will follow progressively.

TREATMENT OF SUSPECT BY POLICE.

(Question No. 75)

The Hon. R. J. EDDY (Doutta Galla Province) asked the Chief Secretary-

(a) Does he intend to investigate the allegation that Mr. Michael Doran was hospitalized on 21st May, 1974, when police alleged he robbed a chemist shop in Carlton, follOwing which he was gaoled?

(b) Are allegations that Mr. Doran was offered drugs in order to persuade him to plead guilty to be investigated?

(c) Will he make public the result of any investigation?

The Hon. V. O. DICKIE (Chief Secretary) : The answer is-

(a) and (b) I will have the allegations investigated.

(c) I will advise the honorable member of the results of the investigation.

SCHOOL ADVISORY COUNCILS. (Question No. 38)

The Hon .. K. I. WRIGHT (NorthWestern Province) asked the Chief Secretary, for the Minister of Education-

Has the legislation which provides for the re-structuring of advisory councils in secondary and primary schools been proclaimed; if not, when is it expected it will be proclaimed?


The Act received Royal assent on 2nd December, 1975. Enabling regulations will be finalized in the near future.

VAUGHAN MINERAL SPRINGS RESERVE.

(Question No. 47)

The Hon. J. M. WALTON (Melbourne North Province) asked the Minister of Tourism-

(a) Is he aware of the problems of water supply being experienced at the Vaughan mineral springs reserve?

(b) Does he consider the Vaughan mineral springs important as a tourist attraction; if so, would he endeavour to persuade the Minister of Water Supply to take action to remedy this problem?

The Hon. D. G. CROZIER (Minister of Tourism): The answer is-

(a) Yes. (b) Yes, and I will certainly endeavour

to persuade the Minister of Water Supply to take action to remedy this problem.

BURWOOD SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND.

(Question No. 49)

The Hon. R. J. EDDY (Doutta Galla Province) asked the Minister of Health, for the Minister for Social Welfare--

How many blind children are institutionalized at Burwood school for the blind, and will the Minister for Social Welfare indicate by number where they are placed during their school holidays?

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health): The answer supplied by the Minister for Social Welfare is-

The multi-handicapped unit of the Royal Victorian Institute for the Blind at Burwood is funded by the Hospitals and Charities Commission.

The Social Welfare Department at present has six of the children in its care placed there to give them the advantage of its facilities. Two of them spend their holidays with families in the community, two others spend them at Kew cottages, and the remaining two return to AIlambie for the holidays.

CARE OF CHILDREN. (Question No. 52)

The Hon. R. J. EDDY (Doutta Galla Province) asked the Minister of Health, for the Minister for Social Welfare--

(a) Is the Social Welfare Department pursuing 'a policy of breaking down big centralized institutions for the care and protection of small children who are at present being placed in Allambie from country districts?

(b) Is $500,000 to be spent on an administrative block at Turana and $1'1 million to be spent on staff facilities at Allambie; if so--(i) what is the department's rationale


behind the decisions to spend such large sums of money on these buildings; (ii) is it possible to re-allocate this money to the building or buying of "cottages", or to supporting groups already developing alternatives to the placing of children in these centralized institutions or doing preventive work in the community, such as child care and the Children's Protection Society; and (iii) why has the community not been taken into the confidence of the department as to the large spending of its money?

The Hon. W. V. HOUGHTON (Minister of Health): The answer supplied by the Minister for Social Welfare is-

(a) Allambie is a reception centre from which children are placed in suitable care throughout the State. There are also reception centres at Ballarat and Mildura and others are being developed by the Social Welfare Department and by voluntary societies on a regional basis. This combined with the provision of supportive services to keep families together, will eventually reduce the numbers at Allambie.

The department, which has 60 family group homes of its own, has provided a $2 for $1 subsidy to encourage approved child care organizations to convert from congregate care of children to their care in family group homes in the community. Subsidies totalling $500,000 were provided in 1974-75.

Other financial help to dozens of voluntary agencies involved in child care throughout the State, including the two mentioned in the question, is listed in the department's annual report.

(b) The projects at Turana and Allambie are designed to improve the standard of care. In the case of Turana a new administration block will leave space free for improving the standard of accommodation of the boys.

The alterations at Allambie will have the same effect and also includes items like the boiler house, fire escape staircase, and cool store which will improve the safety and comfort of the centre for children and staff. Remodelling of the entrance hall at Allambie will offer more convenience to parents and children on admission and when visiting. A new motel-style unit is planned for the nursery where mothers can stay with their babies and learn certain mothering skills.

It is the Government's policy to improve the existing accommodation at both Allambie and Turana rather than increase its capacity. Accordingly other expenditure by the department is directed to developing family group homes, youth welfare services, foster care and other community based care in co-operation with voluntary societies.

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT FUNDS.

(Question No. 68)

The Hon. A. K. BRADBURY (North-Eastern Province) asked the Chief Secretary, for the Minister of Education-

What finance is made available to each of the regional directors for-(i) capital works; (ii) maintenance; and (iii) administration?


(i) and (ii). The level of funding on a regional basis for capital works and maintenance is currently under consideration for the 1976-77 financial year.

(iii) . Library books and materials $2,000 Office requisites and equip-

ment, printing and stationery $1,500 Incidental expenses $450

In addition the follOwing allocations are provided for travelling and subsistence expenses-

Prahran Frankston Sunshine Knox Preston Ballarat Gippsland Bendigo Geelong Horsham Benalla

$ 1,100 1,450 2,500 1,300

600 6,500

15,050 6,000 7,000 6,000 6,000

53,500

ilegislntiue Assembly. Wednesday, May 12, 1976.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler) took the chair at 2.33 p.m., and read the prayer.

SWEARING IN OF MEMBER.

Mr. R. H. Suggett was sworn in as member for the electoral district of Bentleigh.



REMAND CENTRE.

Mr. WILKES (Northcote): Has the attention of the Minister for Social Welfare been drawn to statements by Father Brosnan, when addressing the Melbourne Press Club yesterday and referring to the Government's proposal to establish a remand centre at Russell Street, that it could be nothing more than a cage? In view of Father Brosnan's expert knowledge in these matters, will the Minister reconsider the proposal and perhaps discuss the alternative of re-establishing a remand yard at Pentridge?

Mr. DIXON (Minister for Social Welfare) : Since 1954, when I played my first game of football with Melbourne, I have had the honour and pleasure of knowing Father Brosnan, who is a very keen Geelong supporter. He visited me shortly after I was appointed by the Premier as Minister for Social Welfare, and talked to me about prisons in this State, including Pentridge Prison. He also spoke to me about his feeling that the proposed remand centre at Russell Street could be given further consideration. I took it on myself to look closely at the rationale that was associated with the Government's decision to establish the remand centre at Russell Street. I am convinced that the decision is correct. I am also convinced that some of Father Brosnan's remarks were not in the best interests of a public understanding of the matter.

The press described the centre as being a prison. It is not to be a prison; it is to be a remand centre. The men who will be at the centre will not have been convicted. They will be persons who are awaiting trial.

Mr. FOGARTY: They are innocent persons at that stage.

Mr. DIXON: Yes. I believe it is undesirable to have the remand centre at Pentridge, where the only other viable site was avaiJable. One

of the major reasons for locating the remand centre at Russell Street is to establish it away from Pentridge.

Russell Street has other advantages. It is most advantageous from the point of view of people visiting the centre. It is also advantageous from the point of view of its juxtaposition to the courts and to the police.

Mr. WILKES: These people should not have anything to do with the police when they are on remand.

l\1r. DIXON: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is entitled to his views. I am explaining to the House that I have taken into account Father Brosnan's views, and I am giving the reasons that have been requested by the honorable member. At present a feasibility study is being undertaken by architects. I believe the remand centre which will be located at Russell Street will be the most progressive of its type in Australia. I believe there will be ten groups of 25 units within each group, which will enable 250 persons to be in the remand centre. A whole range of recreational facilities, which wil1 include billiards, television, indoor hockey, and so on, will be provided for the people at this centre. The centre will in no way resemble some of the down-town gaols to which. Father Brosnan adverted.

I want to assure honorable members that the people at the remand centre will be treated as people and that they will be well accommodated. It is my view that the Government's decision to locate the remand centre at Russell Street is the correct decision, and planning will proceed accordingly.

NEWPORT POWER STATION.

Mr. ROSS-EDWARDS (Leader of the National Party): I ·ask the Premier and Treasurer: Is it the Government's intention to await the report of the proposed Parliamentary committee on energy before deciding on an alternative site for the proposed Newport power station?


Mr. HAMER (Premier and Treasurer): The answer to the Leader of the National Party is short; it is "No".

SKINNING OF DESTROYED CATTLE.

Mr. AUSTIN (Ripon): In view of the recent publicity that has been given to the alleged increase in the price of hides, especially light weight hides, will the Minister of Agriculture consider the possibility of meeting the municipalities concerned with the idea of encouraging them to employ an expert operator to skin cattle at the slaughter pits in order to put money into the pockets of the owners?

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture): Investigations were put in train some time -ago with a view to doing just this, although at that stage the scheme the Government announced was not contemplated. Also, it was to have a look at surplus digestive capacity at 'abattoirs, slaughter houses and knackeries around the State to ascertain what commercial value stock which do not command a price in the marketplace might have.

The Government's investigations have not finished, but the point of the honorable member's question will certainly be borne in mind and some result should come shortly.

REGIONAL CENTRES. Mr. HOLDING (Leader of the

Opposition): Is the Premier aware of the view prevailing in Canberra that out of the Commonwealth Government'sausterity measures there will be a deduction of funds available to State Governments for the development of regional centres? If he is, can the Premier inform the House whether he or any of his Ministers have made any representations and, if so, what representations have been made to the Commonwealth Treasury or to the Commonwealth Government to ensure that an adequate level of Commonwealth funding is available in the next financial

year to allow Victoria's regional planning schemes, particularly those relating to Geelong, to continue?

Mr. HAMER (Premier and Treasurer): The first part of the question is extremely vague. The Leader of the Opposition spoke of "views prevailing" in Canberra. I presume he was referring to what is more than just a suspicion; it is knowledge. There was in fact a quite clear statement from the Federal Government that it is compelled to review all its expenditures, and in doing so it will obviously have to review expenditures proposed originally for growth centres.

Albury-Wodonga and Geelong are the two regional centres in Victoria. Strong representations have been made to the Federal Government that funds should be provided for both the centres to proceed. They are both matters of firm policy for the Victorian Government, which designated them long before a Federal Government of any political colour took an interest in regional centres.

Mr. FORDHAM : Rubbish!

Mr. HAMER: I refer the honorable member for Footscray to the history of regional centres. The position is that the Victorian Government has not yet heard from the Federal Government. As everyone knows a 'Federal Cabinet meeting lasting four days was held over the week-end and this was no doubt one of the subjects discussed. I can assure honorable members that the Victorian Government has made the strongest possible recommendation that funds should be continued for both these growth centres, even recognizing that there will be considerable cuts, as there have been, all round. I have no knowledge what the result will be for either of these growth centres. The Government awaits with interest, as everyone else will, the announcement the Federal Treasurer will make.


TRAMWAY BUSES.

Mr. WILLIAMS (Doncaster): Can the Minister of Transport convey any information to the House about the deprivation suffered by commuters from Doncaster in not being able to enjoy the comfort of the new orange buses and being obliged to bear the discomfort of the old green buses? Can the honorable gentleman say why this is so?

Mr. RAFFERTY (Minister of Transport): It is true that there has been a change in the use of the old and new buses. Because of an industrial dispute, the old buses are back on the Doncaster line. The new buses are being used elsewhere. The drivers claim that the new buses are much more easily manoeuvred than the old and that, therefore, they should be used on routes with more turns and that the older buses should be used on straighter routes. The change has been made but the matter is still under consideration.

STATE AND COMMONWEALTH PRIORITIES.

Mr. EDMUNDS (Ascot Vale): Further to his answer to the Leader of the Opposition, I ask the Premier and Treasurer whether he has informed the Fraser Government of the Victorian Government's priorities as between one area of public expenditure and another, in relation to the proposed cuts in Government spending. In other words, can the Premier tell the House whether he has asked, for instance, that education retain the highest priority as against health, and so on?

Mr. HAMER (premier and Treasurer): The Victorian Government has not arrogated to itself the choice of priorities for the Federal Government. Victoria has indicated that it wants adequate funds in all these fields but, 'as to the choices between various fields, it has not said what they might be. That is for the Federal Government.

ARTIFICIAL NESTS.

Mr. RICHARDSON (Forest Hill): I direct a question to the Minister for Conservation. Municipalities and other authorities administering public parks act responsibly to lop dead limbs from trees and fell dead trees to protect the public, but in doing so they destroy the natural habitat of certain native birds. Can the Minister advise the House whether his department can say whether artificial nesting boxes for birds can be set up in these circumstances? Will the Minister make inquiries?

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): I first ask the Minister whether this is a matter of Government administration?

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister for Conservation): The relevance of the question to Government administration would depend on whether the parks were Government or municipal parks. I have had one or two other approaches on these lines and wh~t the honorable member may have III

mind is the preparation for some of the new metropolitan parks by the Melbourne and Metropolit'an Board of Works. I believe there has been some felling of dry timber in the early stages of establishing these parks.

Although there was some laughter in the Chamber when the question was asked, it is a common practice throughout the world to provide artificial nests for birds if there is an objective in doing so. In this State the Fisheries and Wildlife Division frequently provides artificial nests. There is a good example at, the Rhyll swamp on Phillip Island, where artificial bird boxes are pro-, vided.

I note the honorable member's interest in the matter. I will make inquiries and discuss the subject with him privately.


INSURANCE COMPANY ELECTIONS.

Mr. CRABB (Knox): In view of the statements made by Sir Vincent Fairfax, Chairman of the Australian Mutual Provident Society, yesterday that he was dis'appointed at the small number of policy holders who voted at the election of directors of the society, will the Premier consider submitting legislation for compulsory secret ballots of policy holders of insurance companies, commensurate with the Government's position regarding trade unions?

Mr. HAMER (Premier and Treasurer): I am unable to see any real connection between the two. Certainly, the Government has not even considered forcing Australian Mutual Provident Society policy holders to vote for their directors.

WILLIAM JOHN O'MEALLY.

Mr. CRE,LLIN (Sandringham): I ask the Minister for Social Welfare whether it is a fact that a person named William John O'Meally spent 8 hours and 45 minutes outside Pentridge Prison; if so, in whose custody was he placed during this absence and is this an indication of 'an early release of this person?

Mr. DIXON (Minister for Social Welfare): It is a fact that William John O'Meally spent 8 hours and 45 minutes outside Pentridge Prison yesterday. He was with friends, together with a male welfare officer from the prison. The question whether a person whose file has been marked "not to be released", is in fact ever to be released or whether such release would be considered is a matter of Government policy.

ACTIVATED CARBON EXPERIMENTS.

Mr. AMOS (MorweU): In view of the rather successful experimental work undertaken into activated carbon by the Gas and Fuel Corporation at its Footscray plant, will the Minister for Fuel and Power and the

Session 1976.-30

Government encourage the seeking of markets both in Australia and overseas for activated carbon from this plant in the way that it supported an overseas mission on char some years ago? Further, will ~he Minister provide the opportunIty for members of this House to inspect the ,Footscray plant so that they may witness the successful research being undertaken into this valuable commodity?

Mr. BALFOUR (Minister for Fuel and Power) : The Gas and Fuel Corporation has been experimenting with a small pilot plant or experimental plant-as 'a matter of fact, it is generally referred to as the toy-to make activated carbon. The corporation has used both brown coal briquettes and other materials, an~ it is correct to say that the experIments have been very successful.

Currently, the market for this type of activated carbon is being investigated and hopefully something will come from those investigations. It is important to realize that markets for these materials fluctuate considerably, and although at one stage the market seems good for two or three years, by the time it takes to erect the plant, the whole situation could well have changed. These circumstances have to be considered.

The corporation was manufacturing carbon in the old retorts at Footscray, but the Environment Protection Authority required them to be closed down. Fortunately, the corporation was able to continue with the experiments. If any honorable member is interested in visiting the plant, I shall be happy to make the necessary arrangements.

HOUSING COMMISSION.

Mr. SKEGGS (Ivanhoe): Can the Minister of Housing advise whether a public relations department has been established within the Housing Commission and, if so, can the Minister further advise whether it is

878 Questions [ASSEMBL Y.] without Notice.

intended that that department will extend its operations on a district basis?

Mr. HAYES (Minister of Housing): To my knowledge-and this covers the whole situation-no. If there is a department concerned with public relations within the Housing Commission, I am unaware of it.

ADVERTISING INVOLVING PARLIAMENTARY REPORT.

Mr. JONES (Melbourne) : I address my question to the Minister representing the Minister of Health. Has the Minister's attention been directed to the misleading, dishonest and inaccurate advertising appearing in the metropolitan press and authorized under the name of P. A. Jacka on behalf of the South Pacific Council for Natural Therapies? Is the Minister aware that the six extracts, quoted from the report of the Parliamentary Select Committee on Osteopathy. Chiropractic and Naturopathy, are in every case either misleading, wrong, incomplete or out of context? Will the honorable gentleman, in the interests of public information on this important question, protect the interests of truth by publishing the correct and relevant parts of the report of the Parliamentary Select Committee?

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler) : Order! The honorable member cannot ask whether a press statement is correct or incorrect. The second part of the honorable member's question is in order and I invite the Minister to answer it.

Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health) : My attention was drawn to the advertisement to which the honorable member refers~ I was not aware until this moment of the alleged inaccuracy. I remind the honorable member that the report to which he refers is a report of a Select Committee of this Parliament and that it is not the property of the Department of Health. I do not know whether it would be appropriate for the Department of·· Health, or the

Minister of Health, to make a statement on any alleged inaccuracies. I believe this is a matter for the Pariament.

NOXIOUS WEEDS. Mr. BURGIN (Polwarth): Is the

Minister of Lands aware that whenever there are depressed prices in rural areas there is a rise in noxious weeds throughout the State because of the inability of the farmer to control the weeds under difficult economic conditions? Will the Minister favourably consider the suggestions which have been put forward that in these circumstances his department should supply weedicides to farmers at cost for the destruction of noxious weeds?

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister of Lands): Yes, I am aware that in times of rural recession the on-going war against vermin and noxious weeds in rural areas goes into a decline. I might mention for the benefit of honorable members that this is not a " Dorothy Dix " question and I state that because of what I am about to say.

Only this morning I was discussing a number of related questions dealing with the existing situation in rural areas with members of the Vermin and Noxious Weeds Destruction Board. It is my view, which I gave to members of the board this morning, that in times such as these they may well endeavour to reallocate their own internal financial programmes to put greater emphasis on work in the field. I believe it would also be an excellent move if the Federal Government introduced some form of assistance to stimulate rural employment; honorable members from the country will realize the tremendous effort which was undertaken by the Vermin and Noxious Weeds Destruction Board under the previous employment scheme operating in country areas. I shall be making submissions to Cabinet asking that an approach be made to Canberra for supplementary support in this· area.


Concerning the latter part of the question asked by the honorable member dealing with the provision of weedicides, at tender price cost to the State, to farmers as a positive inducement to the man on the land to carry out this necessary work in such difficult financial times, this is a matter I shall be discussing further with the Vermin and Noxious Weeds Destruction Board next Monday afternoon, and I hope from that meeting I shall be able to place some proposal before Cabinet for consideration.

BINGO.

Mr. TREZISE (Geelong North): In view of the serious financial plight of recreation groups throughout the State in raising finance to continue their activities and in view of their disappointment that bingo was ruled out last year by Ministers who are not here now, will the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation give consideration to raising with the appropriate authorities-I presume the Cabinet-the question of whether bingo can again be discussed with a view to legalizing it in Victoria-it is legal in other States-to r~ise finance for recreational clubs?

Mr. DIXON (Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation) : The question should be addressed to the Minister representing the Chief Secretary.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): It would be better to direct the question to the Minister representing the Chief Secretary.

Mr. TREZISE (Geelong North): Will the appropriate Minister reconsider the introduction of bingo as a legal game in Victoria to raise finance for recreational clubs throughout this State, as bingo is legal in the other States, as the Minister will be aware?

Mr. SCANLAN (Minister of Special Education): I believe this is a question of Government policy and not for an individual Minister. It is a

matter I will raise with the Chief Secretary.

PRE-SCHOOL EXPENDITURE.

Mr. ROPER (Brunswick): Is the Assistant Minister of Health aware that costs of the agreement announced in March relating to child care projects were to be made up from reductions in pre-school expenditure in this State? If he is so aware, has the State yet made up a list of pre-school projects which are not to go ahead this year? If it has not prepared the list, when will the list be prepared?

Mr. JONA (Assistant Minister of Health) : With respect to all the projects in the pre-school field for which commitments have been made for this financial year, funds will continue to be made available and a11 commitments will be honoured. With respect to those projects under the child care programme, and those projects which are being funded jointly by the Commonwealth and the State, as well as those that are being funded by the State under State subsidy schemes, there will be sufficient cash flow coming through under the Commonwealth funding arrangement to enable all those projects for which commitments have been made to be carried out.

FOOTBALL GRAND FINAL TICKETS.

Mr. CAIN (Bundoora): My question without notice directed to the Premier concerns the prices to be charged for football grand final seats. In view of the fact that on 22nd April the Premier was reported as having said that $10 a seat for the grand final was excessive and beyond the reach of many people and that in the same report the Minister for Youth, Sport and Recreation said that the increases were too high and not in line with genera] inflation, what steps has the Premier taken to


bring those views home to the persons concerned in the fixing of those prices, as the grand final is to be played on Crown land?

Mr. HAM ER (Premier and Treasurer): I still hold to the view I expressed when the ticket price increased. I believe most members of Parliament would have the same view, that a 100 per cent increase is excessive at a time when we are trying to hold down inflation and cost increases of all kinds. That is one thing. It is another thing to find ways and means of compelling the Victorian Football League to alter the prices for which they are, after all, responsible. They set them, and it is not the function of the trustees, as part of a general proposal, to insist on a financial re-arrangement which may suit them or their views.

I point out to the honorable member that what was proposed was an over-all arrangement lasting three years. I was not present at the final meeting yesterday, so I cannot vouch for it, but at least the prices have been pegged for three years. Most trustees were present and I understand they all accepted that proposition. It w'as part of a general deal and on consideration of the whole proposition it was thought that the trustees should not refuse to accept it.

SKIM MILK POWDER.

Mr. FOGARTY (Sunshine): I ask the Minister of Agriculture: At what age will the large stocks of spray dried skim milk powder presently in storage be considered unfit for human consumption and fit for stock food only? Further, does the honorable gentleman expect that the stores will be cleared for next season when other large stocks of spray dried skim milk powder will be available?

Mr. I. W. SMrm (Minister of Agriculture): It is impossible to answer that question in detail, because, as the honorable member knows, the rate at which stocks deteriorate depends entirely upon

the efficiency of the plant and the methods of operation at the time of processing. As a general rule stocks of skim milk powder start to deteriorate after three months of age and usually reach a point where it is preferable that they not be used for human consumption after eighteen months of age. That is a rough rule of thumb; in fact, some stocks of high quality skim milk powder are quite fit for hum'an consumption 'as long as four years after the time of manufacture.

Arrangements have been made with the Commonwealth Government to monitor this situation to ensure that stocks of the current season are sold before stocks of the 1976-77 season.

The honorable member will be aware that the Victorian Government is under-writing the price of this season's stocks, so it is important that they be sold before next season's stocks, from the points of view of both of the cost of underwriting and of the deterioration of quality. I assume the honorable member referred only to the quality of Australian stocks, 'and that is the best answer I can give him.

ADVERTISING INVOLVING PARLIAMENTARY REPORT.

Mr. WILKES (Northcote) (By leave): Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct your attention to the question asked by the honorable member for Melbourne. I put to you the proposition that if a Parliamentary report has been deliberately altered, that would constitute a breach of privilege. I desire you to consider that aspect and perhaps give the House a ruling on it later.

PAPER.

The following paper, pursuant to the directions of an Act of Parliament' was laid on the table by the Clerk-Town and Country Planning Act 1961-Shire

of South Gippsland Planning Scheme, Amendment No. 20, 1915.

Gippsland Folk Museum [12 MAY, 1976.] Authority Bill. 881

GIPPSLAND FOLK MUSEUM AUTHORITY BILL.

Mr. BALFOUR (Minister for Fuel and Power): I move-


It gives me the greatest of pleasure to introduce into this House a Bill to provide for the establishment of a statutory authority to take over management and control of 'another of the State's major historical tourist attractions-the Gippsland Folk Museum at Moe.

The Bill is proposed at the request of the City of Moe, which wishes to see a statutory authority set up in order that the museum can stand on its own feet. I am personally 'aware that a great deal of -foresight, determination, hard work and cash have been put into this project by the council and people of Moe. I congratulate them on their vision and their achievement to date.

The Gippsland Folk Museum has been open only three years following five years of careful planning by the council and community. Its purpose is to preserve for future generations the way of life of Gippsland's early pioneers of the 1840s through to the more recent times of the 1920s when the operations of the State Electricity Commission had such an impact on the area.

All of this museum's exhibits are totally authentic and in years to come visitors to the museum will know that they are looking at buildings which actually existed when Gippsland was first settled, rather than at re-creations. This has not been possible at all of our major historical and tourist attractions because so much of our past has been destroyed.

To this stage the Gippsland Folk Museum has more than 30 major exhibits. Its most outstanding exhibit is the Angus McMiIlan homestead which was moved from its original site on the Avon River near Briagalong. Angus McMHlan is generally accredited as the discoverer of

Gippsland. In 1841 after several attempts he succeeded in travelling overland from New South Wales to the coast at a point near the present town of Port ~bert.

Other interesting exhibits in the museum are the 2-story Loren iron house-the last example of prefabricated iron house imported to Australia from Britain in the 1850sand an original Cobb and Co. coach inn.

The museum also features a typical pioneer village street complete with shops, post office, church, bank and a funeral parlour. There are also farming and railway exhibits on site and a wonderful collection of restored horse-drawn vehicles.

The museum is a very easy day's car trip from Melbourne. It is on an 8-acre site right on the Princes Highway at the entrance to Moe and has been planned and developed under the expert guidance of 'architects Sir Roy Grounds and Co. It is not totally completed yet but already is an important secondary industry in Moe, providing employment for up to fifteen people.

The museum has become one of the major tourist attractions in Gippsland. In its first year of operation it attracted '35,000 people, and in the past year attendances have grown to 58,000.

One of the earliest tasks of the new authority when it is established will be to promote and publicize the museum to attract even more people to it. If Swan Hill, 200 miles from a major city, can establish a tourist industry worth $10 million a year, why not Moe, only 80 miles from Melbourne, which is so much better placed geographically to do so?

Gippsland's natural tourist attractions include the beautiful Tarra Valley and Bulga national parks, the magnificent scenery along the Grand Ridge Road and the snowfields of Mount Baw Haw. Man-made attractions including the sailing facilities on Hazelwood pondage and the spectacular open-cut at the State ElectriCity

882 Gippsland Folk Museum [ASSEMBLY.] Authority Bill.

Commission works at Yallourn and the Gippsland Folk Museum provide a wonderful variety.

The museum is a non-profit making body and at present is administered by a committee of management appointed by Moe City Council. It comprises three representatives from the council and nine from the community. I pay a high tribute to this committee for its hard work .particularly the large amount of voluntary work which I know has been done over the years and its determination to finish this project.

Initially the City ofMoe gave the museum a $10,000 loan and in recent years has guaranteed its overdraft facilities up to $30,000 to assist its day-to-day operations. The Government has supported this project by grants totalling $200,000 on a $2 for $1 basis through the Major Tourist Projects Committee, together with an unmatched grant of $15,000.

This Bill is identical in form to that assented to in the last sessional period of Parliament in relation to Coal Creek Historical Park at Korumburra, and is also divided into five major Parts as follows-

Part I. proposes the machinery under which the Gippsland Folk Museum Authority will be established.

Part 11. deals with the procedure of the 'authority relating to its membership, the conduct of meetings and similar matters.

Part Ill. lays down the procedures for the appointment of a manager, his duties and the maintenance of an office.

Part IV. sets out the requirements for 'accounting for moneys and the application of revenues, the annual audit, and the borrowing and loaning powers of the authority.

Part V. makes provision for dealing with defaults in financial agreements and consequential matters such as the appointment of an inspector and the procedures involved in any investigation and report by him. This part also gives the proposed 'authority the power to make by-laws to order its

Mr. BaIloUT.

activities and for their promulgation in the City of Moe. It als'O requires them to be laid before both Houses of Parliament.

The provisions of this Bill will provide the framework for the final stage of development and continuity of operation of this outstanding tourist attraction. It will ensure that its future will be guided by an authority whose members will preserve the continuity of local drive and initiative combined with special skills in tourist manage'ment, and finance all of which 'are so necessary for the successful operation of tourist projects. I commend the Bill to the House.

On the motion of Mr. AMOS (Morwell), the debate was adjourned.

It was ordered that the debate be adjourned until Wednesday, "May 26.

DANDENONG VALLEY AUTHORITY (AMENDMENT) BILL

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister for Conservation): I ·move-

That this Bill be now read a second time. It contains four amendments to the Dandenong Valley Authority Act 1963 which have been requested by the Dandenong Valley Authority.

The first amendment provides for the inclusion in the authority's district of that section of the Mordialloc Creek between the 'authority's existing boundary and the N epean Highway road bridge. This follows the agreement of the Mordialloc City Council to the Dandenong Valley Authority being made responsible for the design, construction, operation and maintenance of works of drainage, including the provision for the passage of flood flows, in the lower section of the creek. The authority already has jurisdiction over the upper section and it is most desirable that 'One authority be responsible for the management of this stream.

The second amendment inserts a new section 17 A in the prinCipal Act to provide a means whereby easements in favour of the authority cam be set aside on plans of subdivision

Revocation and Excision of [12 MAY, 1976.] Crown Reservations Bill. 883

of lands within its district in those cases where the subdivided land is traversed by its drainage works. It also provides for the easements to be registered on the titles to those plans without any further documentation.

The third amendment amends section 27 A of the principal Act by increasing the fee for certificates issued by the authority. These certificates set out whether land is affected by prescription of a building line or proclamation of a flood-prone area. The present amount 'Of $1 was fixed in 1968 and is now being increased to $2. It will bring the amount ,charged for these certificates into conf.ormity with the current fee levied under the Water Act, the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of W'Orks Act and the Sewerage Districts Act for the issue of rate certificates.

The fourth amendment extends the provisions 'Of section 28 (3) (0) of the principal Act to provide that the authority may grant easements over any land to which it holds title. The authority is already able to sell and lease such land but at present it has no power to grant easements. I commend the Bill to the House.

On the ,motion of Mr. LIND (Dandenong) , the debate was adjourned.


REVOCATION AND EXCISION OF CROWN RESERVATIONS BILL.

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister of Lands) : I 'move-


It provides for the revocation of the permanent reservation 'Of one area of Crown land and for excisions to be made from four other permanently -reserved areas. The land described in Schedule One is no longer required for the purpose for which it has been reserved. The owner of the freehold land adjoining this area of Crown land _desires to purchase it in 'Order that it may be 'incorporated in a proposed youth and recreation centre.

The lands to be excised from the reserves referred to in Part I. of Schedule Two are 'required for public purposes other than those for which they have been respectively reserved. The Melbourne and ,Metropolitan Board of Works proposes to construct an underground pipeline in portion of the land described in Part IV. of Schedule Two to replace a section of the Maroondah aqueduct channel. The land to be occupied by the pipeline is to be vested in the board in exchange for the disused section of the channel.

Clause 1 'Of the Bill cites the short ti tle and provides for the commencement of the legislation. Clause 2 revokes the Crown grant of the land shown hatched on the plan in Part n. of Schedule Two.

Clause 3 revokes the permanent reservations of the land described in Schedule One and the lands shown hatched on the plans in Pa'rt n. to V. of Schedule Two.

Clause 4 provides that the lands of which the permanent reservations are revoked shall be unalienated lands of the Crown freed from all trusts reservations and the like.

Clause 5 provides that the portion of the land shown hatched on the plan in Part VI. 'Of Schedule Two 'as will be occupied by the underground pipeline may be vested in the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board 'Of Works.

Clause 6 is the usual provision that no liability shall attach to the Crown.

Schedule One lists the land of which the permanent reservation is to be revoked.

Schedule Two lists in Part I. the permanen t reservations and Crown grant which are to be revoked only insofar as the lands shown hatched on the plans in Parts n. to V. thereof are concerned. I shall now deal with the reasons for seeking the proposed revocation and excisions.

Schedule One relates to the Parish of Neerim and a site for a ,mechanics institute and free library. This reserve was the site of the Orossover Mechanics Institute. To the year 1967

884 Revocation and Excision of [ASSEMBLY.] Crown Reservations Bill.

it was controlled by successive committees of management comprising publicly elected local citizens. In that year the Buln Buln Shire Council informed the Lands Department that the hall had been closed and that the Department of Health had issued a lengthy list of requirements to make the building comply with its regulations. The council further ,stated that the building did not warrant repaiTs beingm'ade and in any case there was no demand for the services of a hall. The building was demolished and removed from the site.

The St. John's Lutheran Church of Springvale has recently purchased the adjoining freehold block, which borders the mechanics institute site on three sides, for development of a youth and recreation centre. The church desires to purchase the Crown land in order to facilitate the proper planning of the centre.

A recent field inspection has revealed that there is now no convenient access to the site as roadworks in the form 'Of a deep cutting close to the frontage have rendered the land inaccessible to vehicles.

In view of the small size of the settlement of Crossover the need for a hall is very remote. However about seven-eighths of the township area is still Crown land available for future public amenity.

On revocation of the Teserve it is proposed that the site be sold to the church under the provisi'Ons of the Land Act.

I shall now deal with Schedule Two, which contains four items as follows-

ITEM 1: PARISH OF WOMBAT-SITE FOR A HOSPITAL: This reserve containing 2 . 314 hectares has been vested by Crown grant in the Daylesford District H'Ospital for the purpose 'Of the reserva tion. The land to be excised comprises 4,905 square metres as indicated by hatching on the plan in Part II. of the schedule. It has been agreed between the Hospitals and Charities Commission, the Housing Commissi'On and the hospital committee that the

Mr. Borthwick.

land could be transferred to the Housing Commission for the c'Onstruction of low rental housing for elderly citizens. There is an urgent requirement for such housing at Daylesford. The land has not been used by the hospital. On excision it is proposed to issue a restricted Crown grant to the Housing Commissi'On.

ITEM 2: TOWNSHIP OF MIRBOO NORTH-SITE FOR RACECOURSE, SHOWGROUND AND GENERAL RECREATION PURPOSES: This reserve of 20 hectares is commonly known as the Mirboo North recreation reserve. It has been placed under the control of a committee of management comprising publicly elected citizens.

The land to be excised contains the small area of 1,200 square metres as shown by hatching 'On the plan in Part Ill. of the schedule. The excision is sought by the Mirboo Shire Council in respect of the widening 'Of Galvins Road. The committee of management has agreed to the proposal. The excision will in n'O way interfere with the operation of the reserve.

ITEM 3 : PARISHES OF KEELBUNDORA AND NILLUMBIK-SITE FOR THE JANEFIELD COLONY FOR THE TREATMENT OF MENTAL DEFECTIVES: The Janefield mental hospital reserve originally contained 334·7 hectares, divided into two parts by the Plenty River. Two small excisions have been made from the reserve for state school purposes and road widening respectively. The land proposed to be excised comprises the area of 23 hectares as shown by ha tching on the plan in Part IV. of the schedule.

The excision is sought for two basic reasons. First is the proposal of the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works t'O replace the Maroondah aqueduct with an underground pipeline through the more devel'Oped areas of the metropolis. In so far as the mental hospital reserve is concerned the pipeline will be located in a strip of land about 20 metres wide along the western boundary of the land to be excised. The land to be

Revocation and Excision of [12 MAY, 1976.] Crown Reservations Bill. 885

vested in the Board of Works for the new pipeline will be approximately 1·5 hectares.

When the new pipeline is in operation a portion of the Maroondah aqueduct running through the reserve will be no longer required for water supply purposes, and this portion will be filled and levelled by the board and then surrendered by the board to the Crown. The Department of Health and the Mental Health Authority have no objection to the board's proposal. Secondly, the major portion of the land to be excised has been recommended by the Department of Health for development for residential care facilities for the education, training and care of multiple handicapped children.

It is agreed that the area required for that purpose can be made available without adversely affecting the interests of the Mental Health Authority. It is intended that the land will be reserved under the Land Act with the Victorian Deaf/Blind and Rubella Childrens Association appointed as a committee of management.

The portion of the Maroondah aqueduct rendered no longer required for water supply purposes by the construction of the underground pipeline will be included in that reserve. A strip of land about 120 metres wide along the Plenty River will not be included. It will be reserved separately for riverine bushland amenity and placed under the control of the municipality of the Shire of Whittlesea as a committee of management. Both the Department of Health and the Mental Health Authority are agreeable to the latter proposal.

ITEM 4: TOWNSHIP OF KEILORSITE FOR PUBLIC RECREATION: This reserve originally contained 5·26 hectares and was temporarily reserved for public recreation in 1877. In 1955 an area of about 5,560 square metres at Calder Highway and Arundel Road was excised from the

reserve at the request of the municipality and re-reserved as a site for municipal offices, public hall, library and infant welfare centre purposes.

In accordance with general policy at that time, in 1963 the balance of 4·704 hectares remaining in the public recreation reserve was permanently reserved. The reserve has been placed under the control of the municipality of the City of Keilor as a committee of management. The land proposed to be excised comprises 2,134 square metres as shown hatched on the plan in Part V. of the Schedule. The excision is sought by the municipality of the City of Keilor.

The City of Keilor is presently being administered by a commissioner appointed under the provisions of the Local Government Act. The commissioner, Mr. Kevin Holland, is convinced that extensions to the existing municipal offices are necessary for any council's proper administrative performance which is presently hampered by inadequate office space. The commissioner has taken preliminary action accordingly.

However the design plans of proposed extensions have brought to light the fact that the new municipal offices which were opened in 1957 encroached onto the recreation reserve. Those offices were extended in 1964 and again in 1969 and on both occasions the building further encroached onto the recreation reserve. We are indebted to the commissioner's activities.

The buildings extensions now proposed can, from a practical point of view, only be effected by making use of land within the recreation reserve. The municipal offices reserve was established in 1955 from dimensions supplied by the city engineer. It would appear that the building encroachments were accidental, it being accepted by the council that a wire fence crossing the recreation reserve further westerly of the gazetted boundary was the boundary of the municipal offices reserve. The

886 Second-hand Dealers [ASSEMBLY.] (Charity Collectors) Bill.

land to be excised from the recreation reserve will allow for the building extensions and adequate car parking. No recreational facilities or amenity are affected by the proposal. A number of honorable members from both sides of the House will be aware of the difficulties concerning the site at Keilor and I merely draw attention to them. I commend the Bill to the House.

On the motion of Mr. KIRKWOOD (Preston) , the debate was adjourned.


SECOND-HAND DEALERS (CHARITY COLLECTORS) BILL

Mr. SCANLAN (Minister of Special Education) : I move-

That this Bill be now read a second time. Its main purpose is to institute control over collectors collecting on behalf of charitable organizations so as to ensure that charitable organizations receive the benefit of donations by the community intended for their charitable endeavours. Inquiries made some years ago by the Police Department indicated that there were abuses in the collection of old rags, waste materials and other articles, as a result of which charitable organizations did not reap the benefit of donations of these articles intended for them. Collection costs and charges were eroding this benefit.

Accordingly, Parliament enacted the Second-hand Dealers (Charity Collectors) Act 1970 to attempt to control abuses giving rise to this situation. However, following the passage of the Act, it became evident that the provisions of the Act could not be complied with in those cases where a charitable collector operated through a sub-collector.

Parliament attempted to resolve this difficulty by the passage of the Second-hand Dealers (Charitable Collectors) Act 1972. However, in establishing the administrative pro-

cedures to be observed prior to the bringing into operation of the Second-hand Dealers (Charity Collectors) Act 1970 as amended by the Second-hand Dealers (Charitable Collectors) Act 1972, it was necessary to draw a standard form of agreement to be entered into by a recognized charity on the one hand and a charity collector on the other. Such a document was prepared and submitted to the Crown Solicitor who, however, advised that only about 10 per cent of .. recognized organizations" would have the legal personality enabling them to enter into agreements with a charity collector. Consequently, the Crown Solicitor recommended that the bringing into operation of the two Acts concerned should be deferred. The Government followed this advice and the Chief Parliamentary Counsel was instructed to prepare a Bill in the light of the advice received.

The Bill which is now before the House is designed to re-enact the substantive provisions of the 1970 Act and the 1972 Act, but with amendments necessary to overcome the difficulties which arose in relation to those Acts. As honorable members are aware, a Bill designed to achieve this purpose was introduced during the last Session of Parliament but has now lapsed because of the prorogation of Parliament. As the Bill now before the House is the same as the measure introduced during the last Session, save for only one amendment of significance, I do not propose to weary honorable members with a long explanation of its clauses.

The Bill repeals the 1970 and 1972 Acts and re-enacts them with additions and alterations designed to overcome the difficulties which subsequently became apparent. Those alterations and additions and the reasons for making them were discussed in detail in the secondreading speech of the Honorable A. J. Hunt, Minister for Local Government, who handled the Bill on

Home Finance (Loans [12 MAY, 1976.] and Guarantees) Bill. 887

behalf of the Chief Secretary in the other House during the last session. This speech appears at pages 6516 and 6517 of Hansard. I refer honorable members to the matters raised in that speech.

Mr. WHITING: I think the Minister has the wrong notes, as they refer to another place.

Mr. SCANLAN: I refer honorable members to matters raised in the speech by the Minister for Local Government in another place. In addition to the matters referred to there, one additional amendment of substance has been incorporated in the present Bill. This alteration has had the effect of deleting the provisions of section 29H (3) of the Bill under which the words cc of waste material or " were to be deleted from section 197 (1) (xxxi) (a) of the Local Government Act 1958 and replacing those words with the words "of articles or materials". The effect of this alteration is to permit municipal councils to retain the power to make by-laws in respect of the collection of waste materials and also to confer on them an additional power to make by-laws in respect of the collection of articles where such control is not provided for under this Bill.

On the motion of Mr. STIRLING (Williamstown), the debate was adjourned.


HOME FINANCE (LOANS AND GUARANTEES) BILL.

Mr. HA YES (Minister of Housing) : I move--


Honorable members will be aware that, during the recent election campaign, the Government, acting on its belief that people should have a still better opportunity to own their own homes, undertook to introduce a number of measures designed to make that ideology a reality.

The Government has taken early action in preparing this Bill, which gives effect to the first two major policy decisions in its election policy. The first of these policies, as set out in the Liberal Party election documents, was to-introduce a new scheme to assist middle income couples to buy their first home on very low deposit, by providing second mortgage finance under Government guarantee through the Home Finance Trust at 10 per cent interest repayable over the life of the first mortgage, with repayments geared to income.

In order to give effect to this new policy, it is necessary to amend section 11 of the Home Finance Act, which currently contains a number of restrictive provisions, among these being-

(i) in the case of a purchase, loans are restricted to houses not more than two years old at the date of application;

(ii) the trust is unable to approve a loan where the value of the property offered as security exceeds $30,000; and

(iii) loans are required to be repaid over a period not exceeding ten years.

I shall now explain the measures contained in the Bill. Clause 2, which amends section 11 of the principal Act, revokes the two restrictive provisions (i) and (ii), to which I have just referred, and extends the term for repayment to the same period in which the loan on first mortgage is repayable.

The remaining provisions already contained in section 11 of the principal Act have been retained to enable the trust to continue to operate under its existing authority to grant second mortgage loans to persons requiring to extend the living area of their home or to connect to the sewerage system.

The effect of these amendments is to extend the trust's authority in respect of the granting of second mortgage loans and so enable the Government's policy to be implemented

888 Home Finance (Loans [ASSEMBLY.] and Guarantees) Bill.

to allow persons in the middle income group, not normally eligible for assistance through the usual sources of long-term housing finance to overcome the widening "deposit gap ".

The second policy decision of the Government in respect of housing was to assist other families to purchase their homes through a new scheme of Government guarantees to lending institutions to enable them to lend up to the full value of the property.

Some members may remember that a scheme of guarantees was provided in the first Home Finance Act of 1955 which was designed to encourage lenders of long-term housing finance to lend to prospective home owners an amount which would exceed their normal lending limit. However, this scheme was limited in application and did not achieve any great success.

Section 16 of the principal Act provides that the Treasurer of Victoria may, after consideration of a report and recommendation of the trust, and with the approval of the Governor in Council, execute a guarantee in favour of any approved institution for the repayment of part of any loan made by the institution on the security of a first mortgage of a dwelling house. Such guarantees are presently limited to loans not exceeding 95 per cent of the value of the property.

Clause 3 of the Bill amends section 17 of the principal Act to permit the guaranteeing of loans up to the full value of the property. It will be appreciated that this proposal does not require any funding either by the Government or by the Home Finance Trust.

Clause 4 of the Bill amends section 19 of the principal Act by removing restrictions relating to age and value of the property. For the benefit of honorable members, I would mention that the Home Finance Trust, which has operated for

Mr. Hayea.

nearly twenty years, has a very creditable record of achievements. During that period, the trust has raised from institutional sources an aggregate amount of $34·2 million, and has loaned those funds to 5,640 first mortgage and 3,667 second mortgage borrowers, mainly in the lower income group.

This Bill is a further indication of the Government's wish to help home ownership progress throughout the State of Victoria. I commend the Bill to the House.

On the motion of Mr. EDMUNDS (As cot Vale), the debate was adjourned.


ABATIOIR AND MEAT INSPECTION (AMENDMENT) BILL.

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture) : I move--


The Abattoir and Meat Inspection Act 1973 has been fully administered since 1st November, 1974. Experience in administering the Act since that time has revealed deficiencies in the legislation which require correction. These deficiencies are of three kinds-those relating to lack of power to carry out the purposes of the legislation; those relating to departmental representation on the Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority; and those relating to inadvertent inclusions of matters which are no longer relevant to the meat industry. The purpose of the draft Bill is to rectify these deficiencies.

The authority has, as one of its functions, to consider applications made in respect of licences for meat establishments, and to approve or refuse applications in accordance with provisions of the Act.

It was the intention in the Act that these licences should be annual licences. Provision was made for payment of an annual licence fee but

Abattoir and Meat [12 MAY, 1976.] Inspection (Amendment) Bill. 889

the Act was deficient in that it did not specify that the licences should be renewed annually.

Mr. WHITING: Whose fault was that?

Mr. I. W. SMITH: This is one of the problems one encounters with Parliamentary draftsmen, Parliamentary committees and Parliament. Despite all the processes, omissions can occur. In the light of that experience, this is what happens.

F or purposes of effective administration of the legislation, annual licences are required and the Bill takes care of this matter. For efficient administration, it is desirable that annual licences are renewed on a set date and the Bill provides that the date shall be 30th September. Under the present Act, the annual licence fees are payable from the date of issue of the first licence under the Act and accordingly there is provision for a pro rata charge to bring all licences into line on the one renewal date.

The inspection service has encountered difficulties in service works where, in some cases, a large number of separate business enterprises occupy part of a licensed premises by arrangement with the licensee and carry on their businesses quite separately from that of the owner or licensee of the works. The Act at present provides power for the inspector to deal with the owner or manager of a works, but there is no clear power to deal with a person operating an independent business on a licensed premises. The Bill provides power for this by defining and including in the definitions the term " occupier" to cover such an independent operator on a licensed premises and by including in the definitions "service meat establishment" where this situation operates. The Bill provides that an occupier at any service meat establishment shall be subject to the same requirements in relation to inspection as the owner or manager of a meat establishment.

The Act provides power for the chief inspector to order the removal of animals or meat from, and to prohibit the use of meat establishments and knackeries where, through unsanitary conditions or other reasons, the establishment or knackery is unsuitable for holding of livestock or processing of meat. Experience has shown that there is need, from time to time, for power to take such action in respect of certain parts of an establishment, rather than for the whole of an establishment. The Bill provides that an order or prohibition may now be issued on the whole of the establishment or any part of it and the Bill also provides power for the chief inspector to amend, vary or revoke an order or prohibition of this nature.

Since the Act came into operation, the titles of officers representing the Department of Agriculture on the authority in the original Act have changed. It is proposed that the same two officers should represent the department but that the chief inspector should now be the chief veterinary officer of the department-who is also deputy chairman of the authority. Clause 2 of the Bill provides for continuity of the present departmental representation on the Victorian Abattoir and Meat Inspection Authority. It separates the position of chief inspector from that of chairman of the authority, as it is considered that the two duties should not be performed by the same person. The chief inspector's responsibility will now be carried by the chief veterinary officer of the department.

Clause 3 amends section 10 of the original Act to allow a clearer interpretation of the charging of fees for meat inspection and for branding of meat. It also simplifies procedures for recovery of fees which may be owing, through a Magistrates Court rather than the present system of issue of a Supreme Court writ.

890 Abattoir and Meat [ASSEMBLY.] Inspection (Amendment) Bill.

Clause 3 also amends section 14 of the Act to provide flexibility for the chief inspector to order the removal of animals or meat from, and to prohibit the use of, the whole or any part of an establishment where unsanitary conditions are found. It also provides power for the chief inspector to amend, vary or revoke any order or prohibition made under this section.

Clause 4 provides for a definition of "occupier" to cover persons or companies carrying out independent businesses at service meat establishments. It also includes definitions of U occupier's manager" and of " service meat establishment". This clause also amends section 12 of the Act by including the occupier and occupier's manager as persons required to assist inspectors to carry out their duties and functions under the Act.

Clause 4 also provides a new section 14A requiring the owner of a service meat establishment to notify to the authority the name of any occupier, the part of the meat establishment occupied, the periods of time occupied, and any other information prescribed. It also provides that any reference to a manager of a meat establishment shall, unless the contrary intention appears, be construed as a reference which includes an occupier's manager.

Clause 4 also amends section 15 to include a requirement on occupiers as well as owners of meat establishments, to keep a record book with the prescribed particulars in it. It also makes minor amendments in relation to the duties of an inspector under section 15. The clause also amends section 32 of the Act by making an occupier or an occupier's manager equally responsible with an owner or manager for any failure to maintain an establishment, or any part of it, in a sanitary condition.

Clause 5 amends section 19 of the Act to allow tighter control of brands used for branding carcasses which have been inspected and passed as

Mr. I. W. Smith.

fit for human consumption. It a~o makes it an offence for any pers'on to attempt to recover or remOve any carcass or meat which an i inspector has set aside for inspection or further inspection or which he has condemned as unfit for human consumption.

Clause 6 substitutes a new section for section 21 of the Act. The purpose of the new section is to, make effective the original intention of the Act that licences issued by the authority in respect of meat establishments, shall be annual licences. It establishes a renewal date for licences as being 30th September in each year. It also includes a transitional provision, making licences which would have expired after 30th September, 1976, to expire on that day, and provides power for the authority to make an appropriate adjustment in fees. Clause 6 also reframes section 22 (6) and repeals sections 23 and 28 of the Act, which are now made redundant by the new section 21.

Clause 7 provides a new section 34 to the Act, which deals with knackeries and pet food establishments and which establishes, in the same terms as the new section 21, that the licence for knackeries and pet food establishments will be an annual licence, which will expire on 30th September, and provides power for transitional provisions and adjustment of fees, in line with the new section 21. Clause 7 also amends section 38 to vary the powers of an inspector in a knackery or pet food establishment to colour or direct the colouring of meat rather than the power to brand or direct the branding of meat at a knackery or pet food establishment. It also simplifies the administrative procedures in relation to dealing with knackeries or pet food establishments which are found to be in an unsanitary condition, and provides the power for the chief inspector to issue prohibition orders and to amend, vary, or revoke such orders.

Ministerial Statement. [12 MAY, 1976.] Rural Industries. 891

Clause 8 makes some minor drafting amendments. It also provides power in section 11 for the Minister to revoke appointments made by him of persons as inspectors under the Act. Clause 8 also provides a new section 18, which remedies a deficiency which has existed, in that there was no positive prohibition under the Act for persons to slaughter an animal or dress a carcass for human consumption in any place other than a meat establishment-with the exception that home killing is always permitted to provide meat, not for sale, in farming areas in the State. Also, it removes from section 18 a reference to selling for human consumption, calves of certain weightsas fixed weights are not an acceptable means of determining whether the carcass of a calf is mature or immature for purpose!s of human consumption.

Clause 8 also amends two paragraphs of section 48 rellating to powers to make regulations. It clarifies the prescribing of requlirements and standards to be comJ)llied with in relation to the issue of liicences. Section 48 (d) was defici~nt in that a number of phrases were omitted and the paragraph now is wfOrded as originally intended in the Act.

I commend the Bill to the House.

On the motion of Mr. FOGARTY (Sunshine) , the debate was adjourned.


MINISTERIAL STATEMENT. RURAL INDUSTRIES.

The Ministerial statement relating to rural industries, made by Mr. I. W. Smith (Minister of Agriculture) on the previous day, was taken into consideration.

Mr. GINIFER (Deer Park): I should like to record my appreciation of the action of the Minister of Agriculture last night in making the relevant files available in the Library at short notice. ,My only complaint is

that there was so much material that I was not able to familiarize myself with all of it. I move-

That this House take note of the Ministerial statement relating to rural industries and, in view of its content, deplores the failure of the Government to act decisively for the establishment of a State dairy authority and a Victorian meat marketing authority as a means of minimizing the present hardships encountered by sectors of the rural community.

This nation, this State and, above all, thi,s Government should not sit on the fence while primary producers collapse because of economic factors which are outside the control of rural industry. All people who take an interest in primary production in Australia believe international problems and economic conditions, together with declining prices and increasing costs of production, are the root causes of many of the problems which beset rural industries in Victoria. The industries which are hardest hit are dairying, beef and dried fruits. If it had not been for the wheat stabilization plan, which was introduced many years ago by a Labor Government and which has been updated by legislation on many occasions, the wheat industry might also be in a difficult position. I have heard reports that large pastoral companies in the Riverina of New South Wales may convert to wheat production a large area of country which for many years has been used for sheep production, and this again may cause grave problems regarding exports.

The Government should give urgent attention to the marketing problems of the fruit producers in the Goulburn Valley and to the salinity problem in the rising groundwater which had disastrous effects on the soft fruits industry in the same area.

Although wool has not recently been a large earner of income for primary producers, at least with the guaranteed floor price and the acquisition of wool which fans below a certain price, wool producers have managed to remain in a more buoyant situation. The present drought in Victoria could well develop into the

892 Ministerial Statement. [ASSEMBLY.] Rural Industries.

worst since 1923. Of course this cannot be blamed on any Government. Normally when droughts occur primary producers have to carry or cart water for their stock. Until now that has not been required, but the drought has had a profound effect on pastoral industries, on the growth of fodder and on attempts made by farmers to keep stock in decent condition to last through the winter months.

The Government has not considered the long-term interests of these industries and planned for marketing and the provision of adequate income for producers, particularly in the beef and dairying industries. Figures provided by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics show that in 1975-76 real farm income fell by 18·4 per cent; national farm income was down to $829 million; and the average farm income was $4,708. A comparison should be made with the position two years ago. In 1973-74 the average farm income was $10,625. There has unfiortunately been a fall of about 40 per cent in income since 1972-73.

Finally, a comparison should be made between the average farm income in 1970-71 and that in 1975-76. The figure for 1970-71 was believed to have been at the bottom of the trough for the average farm income. In that year the average farm income was $3,939, but when comparing that figure with $4,708 for this year one must take into account inflation, increasing costs of production and the return to the producer in terms of real living standards.

It is hoped that this year will be the trough and that conditions will improve shortly. However, because of lack of long-term planning by the Government grave doubts have been expressed about whether the bottom of the trough has yet been reached. The Government has not lived up to its responsibilities, and if corrective action is not taken many people in country towns, whether farmers or townspeople, will be without sustenance and income to keep them in their present localities.

Mr. Ginifer.

I am concerned not only with the economic problems but with the social oasts to this nation. If the farms/of thousands of people who will" be involved in this problem in cou~try towns are not made viable the trek to the city will be enormous. Many of those people have been born on the land and their predecessors have given 'a great deal for this country. Much of the character of our Australian rural community will finish up in the city.

What will be the social consequences? An example which can be given is that of students who have passed the higher school certificate examination in the country, have lived a rural life and, because they wished to have a tertiary education, have been forced to leave the rural environment and live in the metropolis in a community which they do not completely understand. They find it hard to come to terms with it, and in their first year of tertiary education become scholastic failures. How much greater will be the failures if families 'who, with the psychological disadvantage of believing they have failed in their occupation in the country, are forced to come to the city? The failure is not of these families but of this Government, which has not taken decisive action to ensure that country people are maintained and kept in the environment which they know and understand.

Mr. STEPHEN: The Federal Government took decisive action and forced the farmers to the city.

Mr. GINIFER: The interjection shows the type of interest that the Government has taken. All it does is find fault in the other fellow. I hope it is the desire of all honorable members on both sides of this Chamber to overcome the problems of the rural community.

Apart from the economic question, the social question will require the goodwill of all sections of the community. Its solution will not be achieved if people wish to divide on political lines. Last night the Minister


gave some indication of this when he attempted to make political points regarding the former Labor Government and the Minister for Primary Industry who is a member of the Federal National Country Party.

Victoria is heading for a tragedy in rural industries. Some matters must be taken up in the short term so that the viability of households at least can be maintained. However, other problems must be tackled so that a large number of people in these industries who have invested a large amount of capital in them can be kept in the rural community where they can best serve this nation. For the people who wish to make political capital out of this I ask: How much longer can politicians of any political party sit on the fence and not do something tangible for the people with these serious problems?

The Minister of Agriculture 'admits that the efficiency of the dairying industry in Victoria compares favourably with that of any other industry. It must be admitted that the other industries with which the Minister has compared the dairying industry survive only because they have tariff protections or heavy import restrictions.

The manufacturing sector of the dairying industry has been one of its most proficient parts, but it has got into economic difficulties beyond its con trol. This is because the effects of inflation and low world prices have occurred so suddenly that the dairy manufacturing industry has not been able to adjust in time to the problems which beset it.

lt is not for me to say that the manufacturing sector should be upset, but the" propping up" propositions which have been put forward for a contribution by the national Government and the State Government will last only until 30th June. At this stage the prospects for the dried milk industry on the overseas market are not rosy. One must look

beyond 30th June in an attempt to maintain these people in their rightful occupations.

Unfortunately, many dairy farmers are being adversely affected, not because they do not have the knowhow, have not been innovative or have not attempted to farm along progressive lines, but because of economic and social pressures. This rolls on not only to the farmer but also to many country towns. One wonders what will happen to Victorian country towns that may well be affected by the slump in the dairy industry, such as Colac and Korumburra, Leongatha, Tatura, Tongala and Yarram. The effects will be felt not only by the farmers but also by the shopkeepers, the working people, whether white-collar or blue-collar workers, ·associated with the industries in those towns which support the rural communities. Last, but not least, when one thinks of training or organizing people, one thinks of the problems associated with those who cannot obtain employment because of the number of primary industries supporting these towns which are going to collapse.

Another aspect that should be noted-although admittedly it is outside the ambit of the Government, but it affects the dairying industry and not much attention has been paid to it-is that of cheese imports into Australia. I have been advised that these imports are equivalent to the production of 250 average size Australian dairy farms. The Victorian Minister of Agriculture might well take this matter up with his colleagues in Canberra to ascertain whether positive action can be taken to promote the manufacture in Australia of cheese for the home market, and reduce the current indiscriminate importing of cheese, pointing out the effect this has on the Australian dairying industry.

I direct the attention of the House to the areas where the Government has fallen down. I refer to the Speech of His Excellency the Governor, Sir Henry Winneke, on


officially opening the Parliament. His Excellency made a minor reference to 'agriculture, when he said-

In the field of agriculture. Dookie and Longerenong colleges will be provided with their own advisory committees and additional courses will be provided for the rural community.

But one finds nothing which would foreshadow legislation to establish a Victorian State dairy authority or a meat industry authority.

I draw the attention of the House to the reports and recommendations of a Board of Inquiry into the Dairy Industry in Victoria which was ordered by the Legislative Assembly to be printed on 7th May, 1975, and was authorized by the Minister of Agriculture. Chapter lion page 41 of the report contains la recommendation for a scheme to replace equalization in the Victorian dairying industry. Among other things, the board of inquiry stated that all milk should be considered as falling into three categories for use as follows-

A. Vlholemilk for direct human consumption;

B. Milk in processed form sold on the home market;

C. Milk in processed form sold overseas. Class A milk would be all milk going into

direct human consumption through organised channels of distribution.

Class B milk would be all milk going into processed products sold on the home market throughout Australia.

Class C milk would be all milk going into processed products in excess of the quantities sold on the home market. Sales of these products would be on overseas markets. Arising from that report a recommendation was made by the Board of Inquiry into the Dairy Industry in Victoria that-

Legislation be drawn up to be passed by the Parliament of Victoria to establish a Victorian State dairy authority and empowering it to implement:

1. The new liquid milk supply arrangement explained in detail in chapter 9 of this report to be phased in beginning April 1. 1976 and to consider payment of compensation in appropriate cases.

2. A scheme to replace equalization and covering the products butter and cheese to become effective from July 1. 1976.

Mr. Ginifer.

The board recommended that legislation should be passed and that action should be taken to commence, in the first instance, from 1st April this year and, in the second instance, from 1st July this year. Unfortunately, the opportunity has not arisen to introduce enabling legislation, nor has the Minister of Agriculture foreshadowed the establishment of 'a Victorian State dairy authority or any form of orderly marketing authority in Victoria.

The Labor Party believes that this is the kind of long-term programme which should be legislated for; that all dairy farmers who produce milk of sufficient quality for direct human consumption should have access to that market. My party believes that all dairy farmers should be able to participate in the production of processed dairy products for sale on the home market, and in the production of milk which is to be processed for overseas use. As Victoria is the most efficient dairying State in the Commonwealth, all dairy farmers should have equal opportunities in each of the three categories of milk production referred to in the recommendations of the board. The Opposition believes the Government has fallen down in its obligations to the dairying industry by not having taken steps to enact this type of legislation.

I turn from the dairying industry to the production of red meat in Victoria. The honorable member for Ballarat South has asked, by interjection, how these things can be brought to fruition if one is operating on a national basis. The policy of the Victorian F'armers Union is to establish a Federal meat marketing -authority, but it also realizes that in the interim something should be done by the State. The union believes that a Victorian meat marketing authority should be established to be responsible for certain functions until the Federal authority is set up. The propositions contained in a pink pamphlet entitled VFU

Ministerial Statement. [12 MAy, 1976.] Rural Industries. 895

Policy on Mark.eting and Classification of Red Meats have been brought to the attention of the Government many times before. The Minister for Fuel and Power, who is at the table, asks me when this pamphlet was published. As his name, like that of all other honorable members, has for a long time. been on the mailing list of the Victorian Farmers Union, he would have known the views of the organization before this pamphlet was released in the past week.

The recommendations of the Victorian Farmers Union are that :a Victorian meat marketing authority should be established for the following functions until a Federal authority is set up-

(a) To set a standard of classification. (b) To assume ownership of the carcass

while on the killing chain or during the dressing period.

( c) to ensure carcasses are classified according to standards laid down.

(d) To set a floor price based on the average classification for all red meat produced.

(e) To set a weekly schedule of prices for each classification of meat.

(f) To negotiate Government guaranteed loans and obtain grower contributions; to buy and market meat which does not meet the floor price.

(8\) To collate and disseminate market intelligence to producers and processors.

The recommendations made in this document, which contains the policies of the Victorian Farmers Union, exemplify what could be done in the marketing of many other primary products in the interests of the producer, the consumer and the nation.

The Government cannot say it has not been forew'arned of many of the problems which beset primary industry in Victoria, because it commissioned a report known in the agricultural world as the Cozens report, which gave an assessment of the marketing of meat in Victoria. The report drew attention to many of the anomalies which have been perpetrated in the 'auction system, but so far there has been no positive attempt to iron out these alleged anomalies or to assist the

producer, manufacturer or consumer in the meat industry. Because of this type of action prices have fallen and stock have had to be killed because they are unwanted on the farms, while the consumer is paying a high price for meat in the butcher's shop.

Mr. BURGIN: Why is that?

Mr. GINIFER: The explanation for that is not known to the consumer. This has not been specifically set out. lt is not because of any action by the consumer or the primary producer, but because of action which takes place between the time the cattle or sheep leave the farmer's gate and arrive at the butcher's shop.

Unfortunately, the other aspect is not understood either. Recently, in a televised discussion on Channel 2, the Minister gave a fairly objective assessment of the position. However, no clear indication was given of the type of stock that was being destroyed. There are still people in this great metropolis who honestly believe that many of the stock they saw on television did not appear to be starved or drought-ridden. I am not putting this proposition. I am putting a proposition that is being considered by many people. The average housewife does not exactly understand the different types of meat, because they come straight from an abattoir and she does not know whether the meat is from dairy or beef cattle. It just comes down a chute and into the butcher's shop, wrapped up in cellophane at "Mr. Safeways ", and that is the finished article.

One other indirect aspect which is besetting local government as a result of depressed prices is that in the near future there could be depressed property valuations. This has been brought to my attention because of an article in the Week.ly Times of 24th March of this year headed "Farmers Can't Pay Rates", which states-

The Heytesbury Shire Council has found that dairy farmers have lost the capacity to pay rates.


A recent survey by the council has shown that dairy farmers· net disposable incomes dropped from $9,000 in 1974 to $3,000 in 1976. Next year that income was estimated to be nil.

This was revealed at a recent meeting of more than 600 dairy farmers at Timboon.

The structure and financing of local government on a property tax, as has historically been the case in this State, has great problems for the metropolitan area, but I believe these problems are compounded in rural shires. If property values are depressed there is no net income coming into the farm to pay rates, and if this continues valuations will fall and the rural municipalities will be unable to continue with the required maintenance work for the roads and the services they provide, let alone undertake capital works.

Finally, I make this point: A move is afoot which has been brought about by the market forces in the dairying industry for a large number of dairy farmers to leave the industry. It has been proposed that many properties in the marginal dairy-producing areas, which may be in the hill country, or the foothills, may be turned over to the Forests Commission and put back into forestry. However, the social consequences of dispossessing farmers in the hill country or in the foothill country must be considered. If it is proved to be correct that it is more desirable that this country should go into forestry, more encouragement should be given to the family farmer to retain the home he has made for himself. If portion of the land is to be more suitable for forestry, some scheme should operate whereby the property is not taken from the farmer and he is able to continue to work in a part-time capacity, either for the Forests Commission or, in the longer term. in a forestry occupation, but be given a guaranteed minimum income until he is in a position to realize on whatever forestry programme he may have in mind.

Members of the Opposition believe the Government has done too little and too late. The problem which

Mr. Ginifer.

besets the industry requires longerterm planning. It entails ensuring that there is a structure for marketing which will take account of all producers, and not only the more lucrative home market, but also the less lucrative overseas market, and that all producers should have an opportunity of sharing these markets. In the meantime, cheap finance should be available to keep those farmers who appear to have vable and economic propositions on their farms.

We also believe that the people who for reasons best known to the industry or to themselves have gone to a location which is not a viable proposition for dairying or beef should be given every opportunity to remain as they are in the community. Some plan should be envisaged to occupy them in their home community, rather than bringing them to the metropolitan area, which they do not know or understand and where to a large extent they will have the great psychological problem of people who have failed in the country and now have to drift to the city to eke out a living for their families.

Mr. HANN (Rodney): I join with the spokesman leading for the Opposition in thanking the Minister of Agriculture for making the respective files available to honorable members. The National Party is deeply disappointed with the Ministerial statement. When the Minister indicated to me that he was going to make a statement, he intimated that he intended to draw attention to the weaknesses and the problems which exist in rural industries today, and to the areas of need, particularly where decisions need to be made and the direction that these decisions should be taking. He was also going to provide details of various forms of assistance that the Government has provided. Certainly in the statement the Minister has given some detail of the pitifully small amount of assistance that the Government has so far agreed to provide to the rural industries of the State at a time


when they are facing probably the most serious recession that country Victoria has ever experienced.

The Minister has already said that Victoria is facing a situation which is probably far worse than the years of depression in the rural areas of the State. A severe drought has extended across the State. In addition, there have been Iow returns in at least three of the major industriesthe meat, dairying and canned fruit industries. In that situation I believe not only the Federal Government but also the State Governments have a responsibility to assist the communities, particularly the farming communities, which provide so much revenue to the State and to the Commonwealth, a large proportion of which returns to the State. On many occasions these industries provide employment throughout Victoria.

The Minister has stated that the dairying industry in Victoria is the most important decentralized industry. Surely he still believes that, and surely that is some justification for providing substantial financial assistance to ensure that the industry survives and the hardship is alleviated. The present hardship is short term and can be resolved, provided that the industry can receive some assistance in the meantime.

A number of factors in the statement are inaccurate. Some statements are even basically untrue. What interests me is that the Minister did not see fit to clarify these statements. I should like to know why he did not. The Minister of Agriculture issued a press statement, which was published in the metropolitan papers on 8th May, stating that there was a $14 million leap in the State's bill for aid to farmers in Victoria. To clarify the situation, I quote from a copy of the original press release dated 7th May by the Minister which states-

Minister slates the dairy industry. The Minister goes on to make several accusations against the Federal member for Murray, Mr. Bruce Lloyd.

The Minister indicated that the Premier then calculated that this would cost Victoria about $4 million.

Mr. BURGIN (Polwarth): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the honorable member is quoting from a press release, and I believe it should be quoted accurately.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr. McLaren): Order! It is the usual procedure for honorable members to state the source of quotations and to quote documents accurately. If possible, I suggest that the honorable member might do so.

Mr. HANN (Rodney): I should be interested to know what it was I quoted incorrectly.

Mr. I. W. SMITH: You said " slates the dairy industry".

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I am quite prepared to accept the assurances of the honorable member that he is giving a full description of the quotation. I think that is all that it is necessary for him to say.

Mr. I. W. SMITH (Minister of Agriculture): On a point of order, it is customary when honorable members are quoting documents that they make them available to other honorable members. I ask that the statement being quoted be tabled.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Is the honorable member prepared to do so?

Mr. HANN (Rodney): I apologize. It has been pointed out to me that I said, "Minister slates the dairying industry". That is incorrect. I should have said, "Minister slates dairy statement". I am prepared to table that document.

The press release refers to a part of the Ministerial statement on this matter as follows-

The Premier then calculated that this would cost Victoria about $4 million so he set that as the limit.

However, yesterday, the Premier received a telex from the Prime Minister saying that the total cost of the scheme would be $68 million which will make Victoria's share about $18 million. Naturally Victoria must now check this calculation.


Why did the Minister not correct that statement in his Ministerial statement?

Mr. I. W. SMITH: That is a correct statement, and we will table it.

Mr. HANN: I am interested to know where the Minister gets the $18 million from.

Mr. I. W. SMITH: We will table the telex. It was drafted by the honorable member's colleague in Canberra.

Mr. HANN: I am grateful to the Minister for providing me with the document he refers to. It is a telex which was forwarded by the Prime Minister to the Premier.

Mr. I. W. SMITH: Where did you get that?

Mr. HANN: It was provided to me by the Minister's private secretary. I have already thanked the Minister for making it available. It Is dated 6th May, 1976. The relevant section says-

It would seem from the other points you have advanced that there may be some misunderstanding on how the underwriting arrangements will operate.

The system of corporation advances has always been a fundamental part of the equalization arrangements. Advances made by the corporation in respect of 1975-76 skimmed milk powder production already total some $36 million and i,t is estimated that at $300 per tonne the amount of corporation advances (including storage and marketing costs) for the full season will total around $68 million.

This figure will be offset in part by the realizations from sales made by the Australian Dairy Corporation and the difference, which is the underwriting commitment, will be provided by the Commonwealth and the States on the basis of their respective underwriting shares.

There is no reference to Victoria having to pay $18 million; there is no such suggestion or inference. Why did the Minister not see fit to point this out? I realize that the honorable gentleman may have made a human error last Friday when the telex was received. He made a statement which was published in the metropolitan press last Saturday and which was particularly featured in

the Age. I realize that the Minister may not have checked his facts before making that statement. However, if he had read the telex properly he would surely have understood that the reason for including that part of the message was to explain the method of underwriting. The Minister did not see fit to clarify that position prior to making his Ministerial statement to the House. With all due respect to the honorable gentleman, I should like to know why he did not and why he did not make any general comment after making the statement.

The Minister's statement left a wide gay in (information, with the inference that Victoria would be paying up to $18 million. That is not true, and the Minister knows it is not true. The honorable gentleman altered one portion of his statement, a reference to Victoria limiting its underwriting to $4 million; he blacked out that reference. Victoria made a decision that would oblige the Commonwealth to stand by that requirement. But why did the Minister make a statement to Parliament which was incorrect and which he knew was incorrect? The Minister might like to explain that.

The Minister claimed that the National Party of Victoria wanted the Government to immediately accept underwriting of skim milk powder to $250 a tonne. The Minister did not say where or how that statement was made. I put it to the House that that statement is unfounded and untrue. Members of the National Party have been deeply concerned for some considerable time about the state of the dairying industry. Many Ministers have been aware for many months of the serious crisis in the industry. The National Party criticizes the Government for its inactivity in finding solutions to the problems. When solutions were put to the Government and some final agreement was made between the State and the

Ministerial Statement. [12 MAy, 1976.] Rural Industries. 899

Federal Governments, the State Government still went back to the Commonwealth with different proposals which delayed assistance.

I am aware of some of the reasons for delay and why further negotiations went on. Some misunderstandings arose; that is fair enough. But surely the Minister of Agriculture knows that the best thing for him to do was to go to Canberra or telephone the Minister for Primary Industry and talk to him about those matters, rather than suffer the protracted delays which have occurred and which have had a serious effect on the morale and financial position of the industry.

It was not until yesterday that the final decision was made about carry-on finance. Apparently this, too, was delayed because once again the Premier and the Minister referred to further submissions being put to the Commonwealth. I understand that the Minister for Primary Industry issued a press statement and that it was given to the Minister of Agriculture at about 1.30 p.m. yesterday, prior to th,e Ministerial statement being made in this House. I realize that the stat~ment had to be prepared prior to Patrliament sitting, but I would have expected the Minister to make some reference to his having received advice from Canberra that final agreement had been reached in regard to carry-on finance and rural reconstruction, and particularly to the $2 million which has been provided by the Federal Government and which must be matched by the State.

I have a lot of respect for the Minister, but these are the reasons why I say that the Ministerial statement did not come to grips with the problems of, and the tragic situation faced by, farmers. Thousands of farmers have had to walk off their farms to find employment. Some honorable members will be aware that at least 50 farmers in the Heytesbury settlement area are travelling to and from Geelong to

work there. The wives of most farmers in Victoria have had to find employment. This, of course, applies particularly to younger people who are able to work; many are unable to find employment. These are some of the heartbreaks suffered by the farming community.

For the first time, the mediapress, radio and television-have taken up the cause of the rural industries. I commend the media for the manner in which they are drawing the plight of rural industry to the attention of the people of Victoria.

At Tongala this week farmers were forced to ask the local municipal council to dig a pit in which they could bury surplus stock. Many of the animals were hungry and would not fetch a price in the market place. The farmers in the Tongala area in the Deakin shire are to be commended on their approach to this problem. If they had not done what they did, the Government probably would not have made a decision to make a cash contribution to farmers who have to slaughter stock. I commend the Minister for the fact that there is now at least a bottom to the market. A farmer now knows that if he cannot get $5 a head for his stock it will be better for him to put a proposition to the local municipality. If he received less than $5 a head for his stock at the market, he would probably receive a bill for the cost of handling them. Mr. Wally Watts and Mr. Terry Makin and the committee carried out a humane exercise at Tongala. There was no drama. A serious problem was solved efficiently and capably.

I first raised the question of finance of this type with the Premier at a reception in his room some three weeks ago, when I asked the honorable gentleman whether the Government would give assistance to farmers and municipal councils prepared to undertake this type of exercise. The Premier was reluctant to


commit the Government at that stage but, of course, the proposition had only just been put to him. I raised the matter on the motion for the adjournment of the sitting last week and the Premier then indicated that the Government would consider the suggestion sympathetically. I thank the honorable gentleman for the decision he has made, particularly as it applies to the farmers at Tongala who were not aware when they put their stock into the pit that there would be any reimbursement. In fact, they paid 30 cents a head to the municipality.

The Ministerial statement was disappointing. The Minister spent too much time going over old ground about what the Government had done in past years. There is not much point in speaking about 1974; we are concerned with the problems facing primary industry now. There was no point in reiterating what honorable members know and, indeed, much of the information was not accurate.

The Minister referred to the trouble caused to farmers by inflation, high costs and other problems pushed upon them by three years of a Federal Labor Government. This particularly applied in the dairying industry where that Government removed the bounty. The removal of the superphosphate bounty also caused problems. As Opposition members in this House are well aware, those actions aggravated the problems of primary industries in Victoria.

It was the policy of the Federal Labor Government to rip off everything it could from rural industries and put nothing back, and we are now suffering the consequences. In irrigation areas where there is an artificial water supply, a lack of superphosphate has caused a falling off in production. Not all problems are related to removal of the bounty, but that aggravated the situation. Positive action is needed for rural industries to become viable again.

Mr. Harm.

Victoria is presently experiencing the most serious drought since 1923 and the situation is widespread throughout Victoria. Once again the Government is prepared to provide only the traditional assistance it has provided in the past during times of drought. There are other forms of assistance which could be applied during periods of drought. It is of little value for the Government to provide a subsidy for the transport of stock to agistment areas in other parts of the State because there are few areas within the State where agistment can be obtained. The honorable member for Polwarth, who is interjecting, may have some on his farm but I doubt whether many other people have.

Most farmers cannot afford to purchase fodder, and this is one area where the Government should take positive action. In his Ministerial statement the Minister of Agriculture should have stated that the Government was prepared to provide subsidies for the purchase of grain. This has been done during past droughts and it should be done now. I cannot understand why the Government has not seen fit to do so. I invite the Government to further examine this aspect and to look at other means of providing positive assistance in an endeavour to combat the problems of drought. Certainly the stock slaughter fee of $5 will help to reduce stock numbers, but I suggest that the greatest need is for a form of subsidy to assist the farmers to purchase grain to be used as stock feed.

An honorable member asks by interjection whether we have irrigation. The problem is that most farmers cannot afford to pay for irrigation water. In the Goulburn-Murray Irrigation District-the Premier will be aware of this-some 1,250 farmers have not paid their water charges for the 1975-76 season. When one looks at those figures, one realizes that the bulk of those people cannot afford to pay, even if the payments


are deferred. That is only putting off the evil day of reckoning because the accounts must be paid some day. The Government has to face up to the reality of the situation during a time of serious drought. It is to be expected that the Government would undertake some initiatives in this area by encouraging irrigation farmers to use water rather than tolerate the present situation in which most farmers are reluctant to use irrigation water because of the cost factor involved, plus the additional costs if they have their payments deferred.

There are two areas where the Government could have taken positive action. Instead, the statement is made that the irrigation areas will receive the same type of ;assistance as decentralized industry. The Government has totally ignored the submission made by the GoulburnWaranga irriga tors league--it has not even replied to the submission made. That is typical of the attitude adopted by the Government in its dealings with the rural industry in Victoria.

This will have an effect throughout the community, not only on the farmers but also on those people in country towns where the farmers are "booking up" produce and essential goods and asking the shop owner or businessman to carry them for up to six months as they cannot afford to pay now. This is a serious situation and is resulting in many small businesses being forced to close. In turn

: many people have lost their employment because of the severe financial problems throughout the rural communities.

The only form of assistance received by the dairying industry-a long time ago the Government " gave away" the beef industry-has been that the Government has agreed to underwrite the price of skim milk powder at $300 a tonne. As the Premier and the Minister of Agriculture are aware, that action will not increase the price of skim milk.

All it will do is maintain the price for the present season and prevent a major collapse until next season. There will be a collapse unless a decision is made in the immediate future on what the Government will do in the long term. In the short term, between 30th June and the date on which we finally receive the recommendations of Sir John Crawford and have those recommendations implemented, there will be problems. From information supplied to me, and I believe the Minister of Agriculture agrees with it, Sir John Crawford is not expected to report to the Government and the Ministers until 31st August, 1976. The earliest date honorable members could expect to see action or a decision made on the recommendations would probably be August this year. That is far too late to assist the dairying industry in Victoria.

If some action is not carried out prior to that, honorable members will witness the total collapse of this industry, and that would have a most adverse effect throughout Victoria. Unless the industry and those people who require finance receive assistance, many persons currently engaged in the dairying industry will find they have no employment and their means of livelihood will cease to exist.

The general picture is that farming communities need immediate financial assistance. Referring to the files made available by the Minister of Agriculture-I wonder whether he regrets allowing honorable members to peruse them-I notice that the Rural Finance and Settlement Commission recommended that $15·4 million would need to be made available for rural reconstruction, carry-on loans and provide financial assistance to Viotorian dairymen during the 1976-77 financial year. To my knowledge no further advice has been received on whether a decision is likely to be made on that submission.


Mr. I. W. SMITH: Reconstruction money is Commonwealth money.

Mr. HANN: Reconstruction money does not have to be Commonwealth money. That is what this debate is all about-whether the State of Victoria accepts· responsibility or not for the rural industries. Members of the National Party and other members representing rural areas in Victoria believe the Government should accept that responsibility, as the rural industries are important to tile livelihood of this State and have an important bearing on its economy. This Government has a responsibility which should extend to other areas of its administration. If the Government does not accept that argument, why have a Department of Agriculture or a Minister of Agriculture, if it is not going to provide financial assistance to the rural industries?

I consider my argument applies equally to rural reconstruction, carryon finance and debt reconstruction. Those are the areas in which there is a serious crisis. The Minister of Lands would be well aware of this situation by the number of applications made to the Rural Finance and Settlement Commission for debt reconstruction finance. What is the general situation? Dittle money is available for this purpose, as the Government is well aware. Honorable members have seen no positive action taken by the Government, to my knowledge, over the past two or three years, on its own initiative to provide funds for this purpose. The Government has always waited for the Commonwealth Government to take the initiative first and then it comes out with some direction on rural reconstruction and debt reconstruction. The Victorian Government has a responsibility to assist those people.

Surely we do not want to see develop a situation in which many farmers are forced off their land. Already many of them have been forced to find alternative employ-

Mr. Harm.

ment, if they can,and some have even had to go to our major cities in an endeavour to obtain employment to overcome their financial problems. Let us be realistic. Farmers cannot put their properties on the market because no one will buy a farm now. Many young people are moving away from the land, and this is a trend which the Government should not tolerate but it has provided no direction.

During the Address-in Reply debate I was the first to point out that in his Speech when opening the Parliament, His Excellency the Governor made no reference to the plight of the rural industries in this State. During the last State election campaign members of the Liberal Party were going around the countryside saying that "Hamer makes it happen". How they won votes in those rural centres is beyond me. In the little blue book which was put out by the Liberal Party, there is no recognition whatsoever of the problems in the rural industries in Victoria. There does not appear any statement on what the Government intended to do at that time. The little blue book I am referring to contains the rural policy speech delivered by the Premier in Bendigo on 7th March, 1976. There is nothing in it to indicate that the rural sector of . the State would stay in good hands with the Liberal Party.

There was also no indication in that document of what forms of assistance the Government would provide. There was no suggestion of financial assistance to help the farming communities overcome the plight which existed just as much at that time as it exists today. One of my colleagues in another place, when referring to this document, claimed that all it referred to was how to control bush fires and to overcome the problem of flies; it ignored all the other problems.

The honorable member for Lowan, who is interjecting, asks for constructive policies. He seems to have


forgotten that I have already referred to them. I made reference to the Government providing assistance in the form of a grain subsidy which would help provide surplus feed for stock, but it is almost too late to overcome the present problems. The only assistance which has been provided in recent times has been for the beef industry, and once again the Minister of Agriculture waited until the Commonwealth Government had moved. Honorable members know that the Commonwealth Government provided funds prior to that, although admittedly the funds were not realistic because of the interest rates charged. The State Government was realistic in the interest rates it charged on the funds made available for the beef industry, but the amount of finance provided for that industry was far too small. The Minister knows that a limit of $10,000 is not enough to assist the beef producers. The total amount of funds made available was too low, and as a consequence many of our traditional beef producers have been forced out of the industry or forced to survive on a mere pittance over the past two years. Many have been forced to survive on their own financial resources.

This is another area where the Government may have given a greater lead or direction, particularly on the financial aspect, to assist beef producers in Victoria. I mention also the brucellosis campaign. Admittedly the Commonwealth Government has not yet come to the party

'and is still considering it. Why should the State of Victoria not carry the campaign? Why should the Minister of Agriculture talk about the Cattle Compensation Fund being $400,000 in debt at the end of June? Why does the Government not put another $1 million, $2 million or $5 million into the fund to speed up the process and to increase the campaign at a time when

, it would be cheaper to do so than

at some time in the future when it is hoped the beef industry will once again be in a healthy position?

The honorable member for Lowan has been looking for positive direction. I submit that the suggestions I have made are positive directions that the Government could take. All that the Minister of Agriculture said in his Ministerial statement was that the Government was carrying out the campaign and looked like being $400,000 in the "red". I suggest that the Minister should have said the Government had made a decision to put another $2 million into the fund. I do not know why he did not do that-that is the type of direction I was looking for in the Ministerial statement.

That is the form of assistance the primary industries are looking forpositive directions taken by the Government on how it will assist the industries in the present crisis .. Those are the directions which the Government and the Minister should have adopted and put in a far more positive manner than was put in the statement the honorable gentleman made in this Parliament.

A similar situation applies to carry-on loans. I have already pointed out to the House-this was pointed out also by one of my colleagues-that the State Government should be making up its mind on what assistance to provide for the dairying industry instead of waiting for action by the Commonwealth Government, which has now agreed to make assistance available. On 14th April the Premier gave approval for the scheme, yet apparently no final decision was made. We have 'come right through until yesterday.

Mr. HAMER: The scheme was changed.

Mr. HANN: Which part of the scheme was changed? From my information, the carry-on portion of the scheme was never changed.


Mr. HAM ER : Other portions of the scheme were changed.

,Mr. HANN: My information is that the scheme has been changed only once. It was changed when some of the States refused the new scheme because skim milk powder was not included in equalization. I have been reading the Minister's file, and I understand that there was no problem. The moral attitude of the Minister was that it was not going to cost Victoria one 'more dollar to do that. All that Victoria objected to was the fact that Queensland was not to pay anything because aB its skim milk is sold on the local market.

The Minister is well aware of the proposal. I do not know why he could not telephone the Minister in Canberra and make a decision. Now we see a scheme, 'Originally put forward early in April, which applied only until 30th June, and six weeks away from that time a decision has only just been made. It is doubtful how quickly it \\;11 be implemente~. Many farmers have had to survIve that period. Some farmers contacted me four or five weeks ago seeking assistance and I had to tell them they would have to wait until the Government made a decision, and I would then advise them, which I have done. That is one point on which the Government must a'ccept criticism.

I have once again had a look at the Minister's file regarding funds. There was some confusion and misunderstanding but that matter has been sorted out, although not finally. Perhaps the Mini.ster of Lands. ~an indicate what portion of the $2 mllhon Victoria will get. I understand that the carry-on portion will be on 'a $1 for $1 basis and rural reconstruction funds will be paid direct by the Commonwealth Government.

That may have been what the Minister was referring to before. If that is so, how much of the $2 million that comes to Victoria will the State Government allocate to carry-on finance, which should receive a high priority because of the difficulties

facing the rural community, especially dairy farmers going into a winter with a low return for the 1975-76 season and a bleak outlook for 1976-77. An answer should be given to this Parliament on that important matter which will indicate how much the State is prepared to put into assistance for the dairying industry and how much it will rely on the Commonwealth.

It is obvious that, if this State receives $1-5 million from Canberm and spends the bulk on rec?nst:uction, Victoria will put nothmg Into this area. Victoria should allocate $1 million or more for carry-on finance, although that is still not enough. I shall be interested to learn what the ,Minister intends to do on that matter.

I have already mentioned the problems of financing the rural industry. That is the greatest single problem. I have raised it in this House before but have received little reaction from the Government. I refer to financing for young ro'rmers, to keep young men on the land, particularly those who were prepared in recent times to borrow money and work hard to establish themselves. What sort of financial assistance will the Government provide for them? The :only finance it provides at any level IS at 10·5 per cent at a minimum, and one has to be pretty fortunate to g~t that This is one area where thIS Gov~rnment should make a decision.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler) : Order! The honorable member has one more minute.

On the motion of Mr. WHITING (Mildura), an extension of twenty minutes was granted.

Mr. HANN (Rodney): I thank the House. The Government should have offered financial assistance to young farmers and young farming families.

The honorable member for Polwa'rth refers to the land settlement scheme which is in existence at present. I do not know what the situation is at Heytesbury, but at


Rochester young farmers are facing financial difficulties because of the high cost of establishing the farms and the problems in the industry. He knows as well as I do that it is not logical to proceed with that s'cheme in view of the problems that exist. It is of little value to borrow at low interest rates if one has an excessively high mortgage.

Reference has been made to the Board of Inquiry into the Dairy Industry in Victoria. This inquiry has cost about $278,000 so far. Surely the Govern'ment has received a recommendation from the board of inquiry, particularly in regard to the liquid milk indust,ry in Victoria, which is one area where Victoria can set its own house in order.

Once again I am grateful to the Minister of Agriculture for his file. A press statement made concerning the Minister's statement which he presented to the Parliament reveals that a recommendation has been made which the honorable gentleman has not seen fit -to adopt.

The SPEAKER (Sir Kenneth Wheeler): Order! From what is the honorable member quoting?

Mr. HANN: I am quoting from a photo copy of a file which the private secretary of the Minister of Agriculture generously provided. I quote from page 62 of notes, dated 20th April, 1976, for consideration in the preparation of a Ministerial statement on the dairying industry. The final paragraph reads-

If we want to secure a more equitable distribution of returns Australia-wide, we will need to show a willingness to put our own house in order in Victoria. I note that the phasing out of milk contracts, which was recommended by the Board of Inquiry into the Victorian Dairy Industry, was discussed at the inaugural annual conference of the United Dairyfarmers of Victoria. I expect to be advised at an early date of the United Dairyfarmers of Victoria's official policy on this recommendation. The United Dairyfarmers of Victoria has decided that the liquid milk industry in Victoria should be equalized. In his statement the Minister should have given a clear indication of where the Government

stands on this issue. My information is that the Cabinet dis'cussed the report of the board of inquiry this week. I shall be interested to be informed if that is so. I also wish to know when a decision is made on the recommendation of the board of inquiry, particularly in rega'ro to phasing out liquid milk contracts in Victoria, and regarding a fair share of the liquid milk market, which is the home consumption market.

In his Ministerial statement the honorable gentleman indicated that if milk was equalized throughout the State the present pri'ce would be 69 cents. That is obviously a far more attractive figure to the dairy farmer who is receiving 50 cents a pound for butterfat at present. That is one of the areas where members of the National Party are looking for positive direction. If action, were taken it would ease the financial problem of the Government and solve many problems in the dairy industry. However, a note in the Minister's file indica tes that the advice tendered to him was that Victoria should sort out its dairying industry first. That proposition has been put to the Minister and the Premier in discussions and they are well aware of the situation.

The majority of the dairy farmers in Victoria are in favour of this proposal. This is one area in which the Government has to make a decision. A recommendation of the board of inquiry was that contracts should be phased out on 1 st April, 1976. That date is well past and we have greater problems than ever before in the industry which still have not received attention.

The branch of the United Dairyfarmers of Victoria in my area, by a resolution today asked the farmers of Victoria parent body to urge the Government immediately to implement the necessary legislation to carry out that recommendation of the board of inquiry.

I am also grateful to the Minister for providing information about a press statement of 13th April, 1976,

906 Ministerial Statement. [ASSEMBL Y.] Rural Industries.

which was referred to in the Melbourne Age. The headline was, " Licence tie in dairy dole plan ". The first paragraph read-

Dairy farmers who apply for the dole may have to surrender their dairy licences under a scheme proposed by the State Government.

That 'matter was discussed with the Minister to clarify the situation. The honorable gentleman indicated to me that that statement was simply taken out of context and that there was no suggestion that the Government was going to take that action.

I now refer to a letter dated 2nd April, 1976, from the Minister of Agriculture to the Premier. I shall quote from page 2 of a letter from the Minister of Agriculture listing the details that the Premier should have taken into consideration when he attended the Premiers Conference in Canberra. The letter contains the following comment-

So that dairy farms will not be needlessly forced on to an increasingly depressed market, household support at the levels of unemployment benefits are essential. A condition of this support may be the relinquishing of their dairy licences.

In discussions with me, the Minister of Agriculture denied any knowledge of the statement in the press. He may like to clarify that statement. I found there was a basis for the statement and the Minister should have made that point clear because he created a great deal of confusion in the dairying industry in Victoria and amongst farmers. When the press statement was released the honorable gentleman saw fit to ignore the need of an explanation. He should have explained to the dairying industry what he meant and it might have clarified the situation. The statement made by the Minister is one which I view with a great deal of concern because it has not come to grips with the real problem that faces the dairying industry in Victoria.

One of the arguments that the Government has put forward is that it was responsible for getting a subsidy of $300 a tonne for skim milk powder. It is not denied that the Minister of

Mr. Hann.

Agriculture and the Federal Government had a part to play in this. The Victorian Government has colleagues in the Federal Government as well whom they might not want to own on occasions-I do not know why that should be so. At the Australian Agricultural Council meeting a submission was made that the 'Federal Government should underwrite skim milk powder on the basis of $250 a tonne.

Mr. I. W. SMITH: You mean $350 a tonne.

Mr. HANN: The amount was reduced to $250 on 1st or 2nd April. I am well aware of the recommendations that were submitted because I have them in front of me. In fact, the same letter was forwarded to the press on 7th April. The letter addressed to the Premier reads as follows-My Dear Premier,

Re: DAIRY INDUSTRY CRISIS DISCUSSIONS WITH PluME MINISTER, FRIDAY, 9TH APRIL, 1976.

Enclosed are two important background papers-

1. My brief for Agricultural Council. 2. Agricultural Council paper detailinc

Commonwealth proposals.

Ministers Balfour, Borthwick, Houghton, Granter and myself met yesterday, 6th April., with Mr. Pyle, Chairman of the new United Dairyfarmers of Victoria. RECOMMENDAnoNs.

1. That the Prime Minister be pressed for the Commonwealth to underwrite skim milk powder at $350 per tonne. Comment-

Refer to table on page 5 of my brief for costs and effect on dairy farmer returns. The Commonwealth proposal does not put any more money in fanners' pockets and only factories would benefit.

If schemes of this nature depended OB States' support, the aid available in future for wheat stabilization, wool support price .. etc. will depend on the amount that the poorest or least involved State can afford at that time.

In this crisis, the other States except Tasmania have a vested interest in not participating and I cannot see how they could be brought into line.

2. If (1) fails, then support $250 per tonne,t.aid by the Commonwealth is recommende .


The letter contained no reference to an amount of $350 'a tonne. The point I make in reading this letter is that on my information the decision to increase the underwriting to $350 a tonne was made on the Thursday night prior to the Premiers Conference. It was made by the Minister for Primary Industry and the head of his department, I believe a Mr. John O'Brien. It is nonsense for this Government to claim that it was directly responsible for the increase to $300 a tonne.

Furthermore, emphasis does not appear to have been placed on the State Government's attempting to force the issue on a subsidy of $350 per tonne. The Premier might like to outline to Parliament details of his strenuous negotiations at the Premiers Conference on Friday to get the Commonwealth to increase the subsidy from $250 to $300 per tonne. I should be interested to hear the Premier elaborate on that matter. My decision was made prior to the Premiers Conference and no doubt it was supported at that conference. Perhaps the Premier would like to enlighten me on this matter.

The real problem that the industry is facing is not so much one of the need for immediate support but for long-term support. This Government has not made a decision on that aspect. All it has said at this stage is that under the circumstances the aid it is giving at present will apply only to 30th June. It is the area of principal concern that the Governmen t will provide support only to that date. The Government argues that it does not want to create a precedent and therefore in future it will not provide the same underwriting support in agreement with the Federal Government.

I have emphasized the problems in the dairying industry at present. The industry has suffered by the indecision in' regard to opening prices for 1976-77. Honorable members should realize that 1st July is not far' away. Why-does not the Minister make a recommendation to his Cabi-

net that the Government should support the industry until such time as Sir John Crawford makes his recommendation which, on my information, will be 31st August at the earliest? If that is the situation, obviously the recommendation will not be implemented until October, 1976, at the earliest. That is far too late. The figure we are looking at with regard to opening prices for Victoria for the dairying industry is 35 cents. The Minister of Agriculture, Cabinet and all members of the Government party are aware of this but they have taken very little action.

In his Ministedal statement, the Minister made no 'comment on what the Government was prepared to do after 30th June except to state that the matter was in the hands of Sir John Crawford for recommendation. These are the areas in which the Government has an important moral responsibility to give' a lead and a direction to the industry. At present there are 14,000 or 15,000 dairy farmers, but this number will probably decrease because in weeks to come many will walk off the land as they have done in the past, unless they receive some direction where the dairying industry is going.

I have a great deal of respect for the Minister of Agriculture but he should not have made inaccurate and untrue statements in his Ministerial statement. He should have given more direction to where the dairying industry is going and indicated how the Government will assist it.

Mr. AUSTIN (Ripon): During the debate on this important question honorable members heard a high level of criticism directed towards the Government and the Minister of Agriculture from both the honorable member for Keilor, on behalf of the Opposition, and the honorable member for Rodney, on behalf of the National Party. I should have thought that it would have been more appropriate for them to congratulat~ the Minister on his Ministerial statement and also the Government on its


initiatives and attitudes towards the farming community. It is almost as though they blamed the Minister and the Government for the disastrous plight of primary industry today. It can be said that in recent weeks, probably because of the excellent articles which have appeared in the Age newspaper, at least the community generally is aware of what is going on in the primary industry field. This has had a great deal of bearing on the attitudes that have been adopted towards primary industry.

Mr. WILTON: What was the Government doing three years ago?

Mr. AUSTIN: The honorable member would have heard earlier in the debate what happened in the past and what the Government has done. It is essential to clarify the position today in regard to primary industry, and put the reasons for the present situation where they ought to be. The major cause of the present disaster facing primary industry is inflation, which was greatly accentuated from 1972 to 1975 during the reign of the previous Labor Government in Canberra. This situation is causing far greater hardship to the primary industry than any other single factor.

No one denies that the dairying industry today is facing a crisis. The crisis has come about very rapidly. Some six months ago the dairying industry was in a fairly prosperous position; today many farmers are facing ruin. The Victorian Government has taken steps to ensure that some of these hardships are alleviated. In saying that I make it clear that there are other aspects of primary industry which will be facing an equally disastrous situation if conditions do not improve. I refer to seasonal conditions and to the economic climate which affect the price of farm products.

It is important to clarify that position because I am sure that later this year extra pressure will be put on the beef industry in particular and also on the sheep and wool industry when farmers are looking for

carry-on finance. These sorts of pressures have not been exerted to the full as yet but they will be felt in the period from August to November. It is essential that the Government should make the traditional lending authorities aware that these pressures will exist and that a realistic approach will be necessary.

It is worth repeating that agriculture in Australia is the most efficient in the world. It produces a total income of over $2,000 million and represents more than 50 per cent of our total export tincome. Therefore, it is absolutely essential for Governments to ensure that the industry survives. I have no doubt that somewhere in the near future prices will return to something like normal. Signs of a price lift are already evident in the wool industry. It is reasonable to predict that in this wool season and perhaps next wool season the returns will be greater than they have been in the past. Again, it is no good having a return to better prices if farmers in the short term are forced out of business. There are also signs in the beef industry that the same will occur.

From the farming point of view the crisis situation has been caused not only by the long hard dry autumn but also by the bearing down of costs. The -Ministerial statement issued by the Minister of Agriculture was a worth-while document. Certainly when honorable members examine the initiatives that have been introduced by other governments throughout Australia it leaves them far behind. Many initiatives have been brought about by the Victorian Government and by the Minister. In particular I refer to the assistance given to the beef industry. Formerly $2 million was made available by the State Government at 4 per cent to assist and subsidize the transport of stock to the market place.

In the area of brucellosis the Government took an initiative without waiting for a guarantee that money would be provided by the Federal

Ministerial Statement: [12 MAY, 1976.] Rural Industries. 909

Government at a given time. I believe that initiative has been rewarded. It was extremely vital to the cattle industry and it is significant that by the end of June, 1976, there will be a deficit of approximately $400,000 in the Cattle Compensation Fund. I am also confident that by that time the Federal Government will have agreed to make funds available as its contribution to the brucellosis scheme and this of course will be of great benefit to the cattle industry.

A total of 15,000 head of cattle have already been destroyed. These cattle would now be a drag on the m:arket. One of the important factors, if there is to be a recovery in the industry, is to get rid of cattle that have no value-those which are in the older age bracket and therefore have no great future. I do not think the point can be made often enough that the Victorian Government has done more than any other Government in Australia for rural industries. The Federal Government holds the purse strings and that is where most of the decisions for our national primary industries have to be made.

The very recent and positive contribution by the Victorian Government to provide a subsidy of $5 towards the killing and slaughtering of livestock under the direction of municipalities is one of the most valuable moves by any Government. The honorable member for Rodney asked why the Government has not subsidized feed grain or hay. I believe a far greater contribution is the provision of money, as the Government has done, to assist farmers in the slaughter of old useless stock.

Mr. B. J. EVANS: That is posi~ tive thinking!

Mr. AUSTIN: It is positive thinking because what honorable members ought to be looking at is the removal of surplus stock from a market that is over-supplied. I do not deny that these things have to be watched from time to time and that a very real need could exist

Session 1976.-31

for grain subsidies in the months ahead, but at this stage the action taken by the Government is absolutely correct, and the feed-back that honorable members are receiving from their electorates proves that point.

The Government has brought about a floor price in the market and this has been sought for a long time.

Mr. B. J. EVANS: A great farmer you are-you like slaughtering your own stock!

Mr. AUSTIN: No farmer likes slaughtering his stock, but it is necessary to realize why this old stock is still on the farms today. These animals are not required as breeding stock for the future. The stock is there because of historical events. One was the loss through strikes in August last year of 22 slaughtering days during the height of the spring season. The effect of that strike was disastrous. This stock did not get to market on those days or the days following. The strike also upset the continual flow of stock to the market and subsequent killing. This had a disastrous effect at the time, and Victoria is still paying for it because of the existence of stock which should have been slaughtered then.

If a subsidy were paid on grain or feed, that in itself would help to keep more stock on farms when we are trying to do the opposite as a short-term measure. It is estimated that the Government subsidy of $5 a head will result in between 150,000 and 200,000 head of cattle being killed. It is important to realize that this is a short-term measure which will continue only until the end of June. The cattle that will be slaughtered are a carry-over from falling prices during the spring season. If the prices had been more reasonable then, many of these cattle would have gone on the market. Because of low prices and the difficulty for farmers to make profits-for old surplus cattle, both beef and dairy choppers, the actual

910 Ministerial Statement: (ASSEMBLY.] Rural Industries.

prices slipped to between $10 and $20-and because of their liquidity problems, the farmers could not afford to accept that price, or thought they could not. Subsequently, they wished that they had sold at that time. The point is that many of the cattle that are alive today would normally have been disposed of six months ago.

I commend the Minister on his Ministerial statement and on what he has done for agriculture during his term of office. A few days ago there were many cases where three cows would have brought only $1. Today, because of the Government's action, the floor price is approximately $10 a head. That in itself is a magnificent recovery, and I believe the over-all recovery of the beef industry will start from that point. Nobody is suggesting for one moment that $10 is in any way a reasonable price for any cattle, but at least it is a great deal better than selling cattle at a loss.

Mr. WILTON: The honorable member used the word cc magnificent ".

Mr. AUSTIN: It is a magnificent start towards alleviating a situation which was quite disastrous a few days ago.

Mr. WILTON (Broadmeadows): Once again honorable members have been subjected to the political exercise of a Minister making a Ministerial statement and honorable members expecting to find out what the Government intends to do about a serious problem. The statement contains the same old hackneyed piffle that comes from this Government every time there is a crisis. The same thing happened during the droughts when Sir William McDonald was Minister of Lands.

Conferences, seminars and discussion groups have been held for years over the length and breadth of Australia concerning the family farm and discussions have covered the costprice pressures, the highly intensive capital investment and the with-

drawal of labour in primary industries. Those things have been going on for years and a mountain of evidence exists to show what the Government should be doing. Once again a situation has arisen in which it needs only a little courage to grasp the nettle and make a decision.

A similar position in reverse arose when this country had a surplus of wheat. At that time all that was needed was a little courage by the Government to decide to back primary producers with a little money. Every time, however, the Government goes to water.

The House has heard about the beef industry, and the honorable member for Ripon told honorable members what a magnificent exercise the Government had engaged in by creating a floor price of $10 a head for beef. I am sure that the beef producers will be deliriously happy when they read that.

I refer to a report from an officer of the Department of Agriculture which was commissioned by Cabinet. The report is by Mr. L. E. Cozens and is dated May, 1973. It is entitled, "Enquiry into the Economics and Marketing of Livestock and Meat in Victoria". Inside the front cover a statement indicates that Mr. Lindsay E. Cozens was appointed in accordance with a Cabinet decision dated 8th May, 1972, to conduct the inquiry. Mr. Cozens is a competent officer who is highly respected in the agricultural industry. He assumed that the Government was genuinely interested in the problems of the marketing of livestock in Victoria, and he performed his duties well.

In the report, he set out in great detail all the shortcomings of our auction system and spelt out the decisions that should be made by the Government. Of course, the Government should have decided some years ago-not now or tomorrowto establish a statutory marketing authority for the marketing of livestock.


One of the fundamental problems facing all primary industries has been the continuing situation whereby the producer is merely a contract labourer on his own farm. He has had no control over the marketing of his produce once it leaves the farm gate, nor has he had any influence over the price to be paid for his production. It has been said a dozen times that no other industrial organization or individual industry would tolerate that situation, particularly a secondary industry.

An example of successful orderly marketing is the grains industry. Another example of what can be achieved is the marketing of red meats in New Zealand because this clearly demonstrates the benefits of that form of marketing.

Mr. BURGIN: Dead meat marketing?

Mr. WIL TON: This House has more than its quota of dead meat when one surveys those august members opposite with all their worldly knowledge and humanitarian understanding of man's problems, who do not have the guts to make a decision. All that honorable members hear are glib tributes congratulating the Minister of Agriculture on the magnificent recovery because of the establishment of a floor price of $10 a head for beef.

On page 29 of his report, Mr. Cozens states-

One of the criticisms of the auction sys~ tern is that collusion and manipulation do exist. In the course of this inquiry, no one has seriously contested this criticism. Farm~ ers have volunteered the information that on occasions they themselves have agreed with neighbours not to bid against one another. At least one processing firm has freely admitted sharing the costs and ser· vices of a buyer from a rival enterprise in the course of buying at small country auc~ tions.

Such a practice was defended on the grounds that small country auctions would otherwise be too expensive to attend at all. In general, collusion is thought to occur more often at the smaller country auctions and at the larger auction centres on those occasions when the market is over~supplied.

It 'has been widely acknowledged by all sections of this primary industry that collusion is going on at the expense of the producer. The honorable member for Keilor referred to the pamphlet produced by the Victorian Farmers Union which spelt out its policy on the establishment of a statutory marketing authority, and also the service that authority would supply to the industry in the form of marketing service and information, which is most important. What is also needed is information on the market servicing operation, and on what sort of livestock the producer should be raising. Meat processing companies today all agree that because of the widely varying market that now exists, particularly on the export market, the buyer is dem'anding a whole range of varying grades and qualities of meat. It is a buyer's market, not a seller's market. It is no longer good enough for people to go along with the idea that because an animal is of a certain breed he will produce it; he will find that he will receive a lower price because he is producing a type of meat which it is difficult to sell on the export market.

Experienced people are available to the Government through the processing companies. Honorable members should go to Portland and check with the people at Thomas Borthwick and Sons (Australasia) Ltd. They can give verse and chapter on the various qualities and grades they have to provide to customers on overseas markets. Farmers who are' prepared to go to the trouble of informing themselves are able to get better returns. In the current depressed situation they are able to obtain for themselves a reasonable return on their production. This is the role the Government and the Department of Agriculture have to play. The department can play it through these statutory authorities, but it needs action from the Government, and from the Minister. To date there· has been nothing but an exercise in

912 Ministerial Statement: [ASSEMBLY.] Rural Industries.

semantics. The Minister has come into the House and read a Ministerial statement in which he has had a slight kick at the Federal Government and given the National Party a metaphorical clip over the ears. The Minister seems to think that will solve the problems.

Of course there will be more inquiries. The honorable member for Keilor referred to the Board of Inquiry into the Dairying Industry in Victoria. Its first report was made in May, 1975. The honorable member for Ripon spoke about the rapid deterioration in the dairying industry. It is obvious that he has not read the report of the board of inquiry, which made positive recommendations. Again, no action, was taken by the Minister, and so the whole process goes on year after year.

Last year I went with the then representative of the Liberal Party, Mr. Baillieu, to the annual conference of the Grasslands Society of Victoria, the theme of which was "Strategy For Family Farmers". Mr. Baillieu had quite a lot to s,ay in pressing his party's philosophy on rural affairs. He always referred to the Liberal-Country Party. When dealing with monetary policies he s'aid that his party had a policy of establishing :a rural bank, and he said-

We hope to do this in conjunction with trading banks and insurance companies, but if that cannot come about we will establish a rural bank in any case for long-term loans.

The honorable member for Ripon talked about the pressures that primary industries will bear later this year when they will be needing carry-on finance. He s'aid that he hoped the Government would go to the lending institutions and say, "The farmers want some money, lend it to them". The lending institutions will say, " On what? Choppers and windblown paddocks? Not on your life!" What can the Government do--stand over them? What means has the Government at its disposal of producing

Mr. Wilton.

long-term finance to relieve the farmer from the necessity of having to go to the money lenders, to the usurers, who, in times of pressure, lend money to primary producers at outrageous rates of interest?

Mr. STEPHEN: Who are they?

Mr. WIL TON: The honarable member for Ballarat South would know them better than I would because of the circles he moves in. The only structure I know of in this State which can provide help is the Rural Finance and Settlement Commission. It will be interesting to see what financial provision the Premier makes in the Budget which he will introduce into Parliament later this year to enable that authority to carry out the functions af a rural bank. It is obvious that what Mr. Baillieu was saying at La Trobe University last year was related to the attitudes and policies of the Victorian Liberal Government. I have no doubt that Mr. Baillieu was sincere when he said that a rural bank would be established.

Mr. PLOWMAN: That is Federal policy. He isa Federal member.

Mr. WILTON: I take it from the interjections of the honorable member for Evelyn that the Liberal Party lives in two worlds-Federal policy is one matter; State policy is another. This is a handy excuse which the Government has used over a long period. Sir Henry Botte was an expert at it. In every 'Budget speech that he delivered he gave the Federal Government a decent serve. He did it regularly and got away with it. The Premier and his Ministers have taken a leaf out of his book and are following the same pattern. They say, " It is not our fault; it is the Federal Government's fault. We cannot do anything."

Let me refer to what this devious Government c'an do when it gets its grubby little fingers into the cash register. Look at what happened to the dairy reconstruction scheme! When the Whitlam Federal Government substantially expanded the

Ministerial Statement: [12 MAY, 1976.] Rural IndUSTries. 913

scheme to the point where $14 million of Federal money came into Victoria -as a result of the expansion of that scheme, what happened? The State Electricity Commission applied a horse-power tax to the electric motors used by dairy farmers who installed refrigerated vats. That was an $800 rip-off on each farm. The Federal Government 'advanced 1,475 loans under this reconstruction scheme at $800 a farm, the motors on average being of 10 horse-power. According to my arithmetic, 1,475 farmers,at $800 a farm, makes a total of $1,100,000 of 'Federal money syphoned into the State Electricity Commission. Then, because of the State Government's gross turnover tax, 4 per cent of that -amount went into the Consolidated Fund. What was the Government's attitude when protests were made by the dairy division of the Victorian Farmers Union in seeking assistance for f.armers who had to pay that money? The Minister for Fuel and Power said that the best the Government could do w'as to cut the tax from $85 to $80 for each horse-power.

In the financial year 1974-75, the State Electricity Commission paid to the State Government ,$13 million in turnover tax. On top of that :a coal royalty of 2·5 cents a tonne yielded $8·7 million. The farming community asked the State Government to join with the Commonwealth Government in making 'a contribution to the dairy reconstruction programme by removing this tax, and allowing the money provided by the Commonwealth Government to be spread over a larger number of farmers, but the answer was an emphatic "No". The result was that 200 farmers missed out; 200 more farmers could have been assisted if the Government had been prepared to adopt that attitude.

That is the track record of the Government in coming to grips with the problems confronting the prim:ary industry. No action was taken by the Government on the marketing of livestock. Although the Cozens

report was commissioned by Cabinet there was still no action. In the dairying industry a board of inquiry was appointed by the Minister, and the Minister came to Parliament with two reports suggesting that there should be a single statutory authority phasing out all milk contracts so that all milk producers could share in the milk distribution, but no action resulted.

How long can this go on? Primary industry has had the misfortune to suffer a non-action Liberal Government in Victoria for the past twenty years. That is its major problem. I do not think it will get any action out of this Government. The Government will go on establishing inquiries and in-depth studies, hoping that eventually something will happen that will solve the problem. I join with Mr. Heffernan when he s'ays that no longer can the farmer live in isolation; no longer can he be an individualist-he has to bea part of an organization, part of a structure where he or his representative will have some influence and control over the prices that will be paid for the commodities that he produces. The Opposition firmly believes that is right. It points to the grain grower and the wool producer in Australia today to clearly establish the worth of that philosophy.


Mr. WILTON: Prior to the suspension of the sitting for dinner I was making the point that the producer has reached a stage where he can no longer live in isolation or be an individualist. Like all other sections of the community he has to face up to the fact that he must become part of an organization. I have had a long association with the trade union movement and realize that unity is strength. The farming community must be made aware of this.

In the absence of orderly marketing and statutory authorities, there will continue to be a "boom and


bust" situation. The international markets fluctuate substantially at times. Every section of primary industry at some time has enjoyed high prices but within a short period the bottom has dropped out of the market. In Australia periods of high prices have caused a dramatic swing from one form of primary production to another thus creating overproduction.

It is tragic that a succession of Liberal Governments have not learned from past mistakes but has continued to follow the policy of blocking up a hole and shoring up something here and there and never coming to grips with the main problem.

I am pleased that the leaders of prim'ary industry are becoming more aware of the need to bring greater pressure on the Government of the day to tackle the problem. They are seeing the salvation of their industry in a series of orderly marketing systems headed by statutory authorities which not only have grower representation but if a manufacturing sector is involved it would be entitled to representation. Consumer representation is equally important.

As a result of the establishment of the United Nations food and agricultural organization, and with the world food programme, that body has instigated the Freedom from Hunger Campaign with the result that countries are becoming more aware of the hunger and malnutrition that exist in many of the developing nations.

Professor Birch has just produced a book entitled Confronting the Future, which is interesting reading and has been given wide publicity. He makes the point that at present a third of the world's population are living in affluence while two-thirds are living in poverty and suffering varying degrees of malnutrition. He contends that that situation will not be allowed to continue and that man is on a collision course.

Mr. Wilton.

The world conference which was held in Rome in November, 1974, attempted to come to grips with the problem of world food production capacity as against the popUlation production. From the conference came a new concept of food-population balance. Papers presented clearly show that man is losing the race. That situation cannot continue.

In Australia, primary industry is a major factor in foreign earnings, and the general well-being of the community is related to those earnings. Tonight figures have been quoted that in excess of 50 per cent of our foreign income is earned from exporting primary products.

In Victoria today farmers are being forced to destroy livestock because of circumstances beyond their control. This results from marketing and climatic conditions. ThE: farmers are really reducing the level of production. When one considers the question of redUCing production and then recalls that at the Rome conference of 1974 eminent people told the world at large that we are lOSing the race in the populationfood balance, obviously something is drastically wrong. If one takes note of the thesis of Professor Birch one might ask, "where are we going to end up?" It is obvious we are on a collision course. It is fair to say that hungry people can become aggressive.

I Sincerely hope the Government will do something more positive than we have seen to date in meaningful decisions to start and develop long-term programmes to solve the immediate problem of Victorian farmers.

The Government must be prepared to consider the farming sector as a minority group within the rural community. Because of the nature and history of that community it is heavily dependent on primary industry. When primary industry is in a state of recession the whole community suffers. Here again, there


has been inactivity from the Government even in the area of services requi~ed by the rural community.

If one takes the Ministerial statement of the Minister of Agriculture in its broad context and examines the whole question of the rural community and not just the farming section of that community, one asks what the Government has done to assist local government in rural areas. The local government structure in a rural community has the same problems as those that exi.st in the metropolitan areas. It has to provide services. The level of services provided by a statutory authority determines to a large extent the welfare and well-being 'of the people living in those communities.

Honorable members, even in this session, have raised the question of workers compensation pr,emiums that ha ve to be paid by local government. Yet when the Whitlam Government \vas in office, and the national Parliament wanted to bring in a national workers compensation scheme which would have gone a long way towards alleviating the problem, the Victorian Government opposed and destroyed the efforts of that Government. When one considers all of these matters one can readily see that the Minister's making of his statement and the debate that has followed is just an exercise in semantics by the Government.

In the 21 years that the Liberal Party Government has been in office it could have taken the steps that everybody is crying out for. The farmer organizations and the departmental officers have prepared all the evidence that the Government needed. All the necessary assistance has been given to the Minister but no action or decisions have followed. If this debate does nothing else I sincerely hope that it will at least stir the Minister and the Government into taking the positive steps that are needed.

The Government should make the decisions for which the farming community is crying out instead of continuing to prop up the industry. That does not solve the problem, but only misleads the farming community. Farmers should realize that the Liberal Party in Victoria is taking them for granted. Its attitude is that the farmer's vote is there at any time the party wants it, and he is being treated accordingly. The farmer should wake up to this attitude and come to grips with the problem, because some responsibility lies on the farming community.

One of the important roles that government can play in over-all food production compared with market demands is to conduct trade negotiations which are very important to Australian primary industry. That situation was highlighted when the Whitlam Government came to power, because One of the first steps it took was to establish diplomatic relations with Communist China. The benefits that resulted to primary industry from that move are now history. Those are the sorts of decisions that Governments must be prepared to make.

Mr. 1. W. SMITH: We were selling wheat to China before that.

Mr. WILTON: That is true, but the people who made up the delegation that went to China before diplomatic relations were established with that country could tell the Minister of the difficulties they encountered and the obstacles which they had to overcome.

The establishment of diplomatic relationships with China has meant that continuous on-going representations are made, assurances are sought and agreements are reached at the highest possible level. These are the advantages that can flow to primary industry.

I sincerely hope that the national Governments of Australia and other developed nations will change their attitudes towards granting foreign aid and will be prepared to make a


greater contribution towards overcoming the widespread malnutrition and starvation that exists amongst two-thirds of the world's population. If they do not, the future for mankind will be bleak. For the sake 'Of future generations, I hope it is not too late.

Mr. EBERY (Midlands): The honorable members who have contributed to the debate tonight have amplified the fact that the rural sector has to overcome enormous difficulties. The honorable members for KeiIor and Rodney commented on these matters, and I agree with their remarks.

One matter that concerns me about the future of the rural sector is that at present the average age of farmers is 56 years. Unless some realization and understanding of their problems are reached through the many Parliaments of Australia, the number of farmers will diminish and there will be a serious decline in the productivity of Australia. Consequently, the prices of commodities will be far higher than they are now.

It has often been said that the Australian farmer is one of the most viable farmers in the world. The farmers are suffering the effects of the high inflation rate to which Australia has been subjected over the past few years. Telephone and postal charges have compounded the difficulties of the rural sector. Mention has been made of the decisive action that is necessary to overcome the situation, but what has not been said is that things have to be done on a national level. The Victorian Government and the Minister of Agriculture have done everything possible to overcome the difficulties that I mentioned. Wheat and wool as well as other primary products sold on overseas markets must be the subject of national interest. The Ministerial statement proves that the Victorian Government and Minister of Agriculture have done more than their part in trying to overcome the problems of the fanners at State level.

Another aspect that has not been referred to is that incentives provided by other State Governments and the Commonwealth Government have been almost non-existent. Probably only about three initiatives have been taken in an attempt to overcome the problems of the primary producers. The first was the superphosphate bounty, which was given as a result of the Industries Assistance Commission report; the second was the investment allowance by which $4 million was made available to stabilize export subsidies on a $1 for $1 basis with the States, and the third was the increase in the price of grapes in South Australia. The Victorian Minister of Agriculture initiated discussions designed to lead to greater stability within this industry. Comments made during the debate have indicated that the Victorian Government has not been operating as satisfactorily as members of the Opposition desire, but these incentives show that that is not the case.

Not only the Minister of Agrk'llture has tried to assist Victorian primary producers, but the Minister of Water Supply has also helped greatly in some irrigation areas in northern Victoria. In some areas, because of the lack of viability of allotments where irrigation water rights existed, farmers are now allowed to irrigate neighbouring land to increase their viability. Sometimes, particularly when the beef industry is at such a low ebb, farmers will be able to diversify operations by irrigating crops or pastures to make their land more viable. As a farmer, I would certainly like to have water rights on a property. People do not realize how much benefit they can provide to farms. The endeavours of the Minister of Water Supply in this regard will help the farms to improve.

The State Government has assisted primary producers in many other areas. Other members referred to the campaign for the eradication of tuberculosis and brucellosis, which


was sponsored by the Victorian Government. Again, this should be done on a national basis. Unless other State Governments take similar action to eradicate these diseases and allow the export of meat to other countries, the matter cannot be resolved to the benefit of export commodities, such as red meats. It has been noticeable that the Leader of the National Party has so far not made any contribution to the debate, and I shall be interested to hear his comments on the future of agricultural pursuits in Victoria. Many positive efforts have been made by the Victorian Government to overcome these problems.

Mr. Ross-EDWARDS: What do you mean by that statement? You know that I am going to speak soon.

Mr. EBERY: These are important problems which everybody in this House believes should be overcome.

Mr. McINNES (Gippsland South): I compliment the honorable member for Rodney on the factual and positive address which he made this evening. The honorable member spoke with a wide knowledge of the industry, but unfortunately also in the light of information obtained from a file oroduced by the Minister of Agriculture and of a promise that positive action would be taken to help an ailing industry.

Members of the National Party were distressed to learn that errors had occurred through the correspondence and that there has been a lack of communication between the Federal and State Governments and a lack of understanding of some of the most elementary points.

After the Premier had been advised by the Minister of Agriculture that the Government's contribution to the relief scheme was $4 million, he must have been shocked to learn that it would in fact be $18 million. This is an example that makes one wonder how well informed the Victorian Minister of Agriculture is about an industry that comes directly under his control. Many people, especially

members of the National Party, share the misgiving that the Government may not be aware of the deteriorating situation and that it believes that, given time, the problem may go away.

Other people in important places share that view of the Government. I refer to a statement made by the Bishop of Gippsland, Bishop Delbridge, which was reported in the Gippsland Times of 26th April. I shall read the statement because it illustrates the feelings of an esteemed and responsible person. When speaking at the Diocesan 25th Synod in Sale, Bishop Delbridge said-

As far as Gippsland is concerned, there is a great danger of the country being neglected in favour of the city, or the city looking on the country as merely a place from which water, power, milk and timber, and indeed oil and gas, are taken for the use of the city and the suburbs without consideration being adequately given to putting anything back in the place of that which has been taken. Nor indeed has adequate consideration been given to what happens to people and the countryside as a result of this supplying of the capital city of Victoria.

I wish to draw attention to the worry and difficulties experienced by cattlemen and wool growers. Economic conditions, industrial disputes, and droughts have caused a burden not only to the one-time-considered wealthy landowners, but to those who earn their living in industries allied to wool, wheat, timber and milk.

But let me take one example to throw up the light of the problem of the people in Gippsland as I see it as your Bishop.

SOME RELIEF. The dairy farmer-I cannot understand

why the authorities both in Canberra and in Melbourne have been so long in hearing the call for help by the dairy farmer. I am glad to know that relief at last has in some degree been promised. Will this be enough? Is it too little too late? Is it because of the smaller numbers that they appear to be politically insignificant?

Finally the Bishop discusses the unemployment situation and goes on to say-

I hope that soon the cry of the need of the people of Gippsland, including the dairy farmers, will be heard, and it will be remembered that those involved with their wives and the families (for the whole family is nearly always involved) are people, and must not be seen as entities in the numbers game-they are people-I believe it is the


role of the church to bring the value of the human person before the community otherwise all will be lost.

That is a significant statement emanating from a person in a high position, who is held in the highest esteem in Gippsland as a humanitarian and is extremely well liked throughout the whole of his diocese. Why should it be necessary to w,ait for bishops and other people who are not directly connected with an industry to speak out before action is taken?

Surely the task of the Minister of Agriculture and his department must be to keep under surveillance an industry which is under their care and protection. I hope the Ministry of Agriculture is not simply a service operation. Surely some lead must be given in this situation. We hope the expertise is available to the Minister within the department to enable him to form the judgments that he must make. We hope the Premier, as the Leader in Victoria, will take account of an industry which is perhaps one of the most significant industries in Victoria. It is an industry of which Victoria has the lion's share, some 60 per cent or 70 per cent in Australia. There are 14,000 dairy farmers in the industry. The debate is not confined simply to dairy farmers. There is a rural crisis. The attitude seems to have been one of stand aside and hope things might happen.

The honorable member for Broadmeadows made the point that the problem was partly with the Government-I agree with this-and partly with the farmer himself.

Mr. CAIN: And the economic system.

Mr. McINNES: This is where a wise and just Government should be taking heed. The industry has been running downhill for a long time. The problem is that those who have been in a position to advise and counsel the farmer, the Departments of Agriculture, both Federal and State, have failed in their duty. They

appear to have ignored the problem and stepped in, as the Bishop has said, with too little and too late.

We are not here simply to slather the Government, because frankly I believe it has gone past the stage of obtaining some political mileage out of the situation, or of immediate and prompt assistance for the industry.

Mr. AMOS: What is the honorable member proposing?

Mr. McINNES: We are now moving towards a social welfare situation. This is a further stage, and many people consider that the farmers have become completely demoralized. That is true. They are seeing not only their business but also their families badly affected. Today there is evidence of an increase in medical and tension problems in the industry. How could it be otherwise when these people are getting no return from an enterprise into which they have put all their assets and efforts, and also the efforts of their families-wives and children? Yet they are totally ignored by the rest of the community until they reach a stage of being presented on the front page of the newspapers as shooting stock by the thousands and walking off their farms. This is not simply the fault of the people in the industry. They bear little of the responsibility. I believe it comes back strongly to those who have access to the sort of information that could have ameliorated and avoided the situation. Therefore, I move-

That after the word "decisively" the words "to provide immediate assistance to maintain a reasonable level of income in rural industries and to legislate" be inserted--

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. McLaren): Order! I remind honorable members that any further debate will take place both on the motion before the Chair and the amendment.

Mr. McINNES: It is unfortunate that as the Liberal Party representation has increased in country areas, the fortunes of the farmer have


progressively diminished. Dairy farmers in particular seem to have virtually no collective bargaining power with the industry with which to protest and improve their situation. They have been let down by some of the people who ought to be representing them.

For many years the industry has been declining for one reason or another, but if it can simply be put at a sociological level, so to speak, all people are entitled to an income. Our colleagues in the Opposition have always fought for wage justice, and rightly so. The people whom the Liberal Party predominantly represent, manufacturers 'and so on, have been able to apply on-cost principles and pass on the various costs applied to them to the consumer. With the advent of wage indexation, protection has now been afforded to employers and employees by the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. Unfortunately, the farmer is in a twilight zone between the two. On the one hand, he is called 'a small businessman and is expected to sink or swim on his own, but on the other hand the Government, and to a great extent the external forces acting on it, such as the export market, have been successful in reducing him to a lower and lower status.

It comes back to whether the nation as a whole really wants an export income derived from rural industry. Every man and woman in the community must make that decision. The farmer is not producing for the export market because he thinks there is money in it; he is producing because he has been told by experts and academics over many years, and by people holding responsible positions in the Department of Agriculture 'and in primary industry. that it is necessary to provide for an international market and that he should be improving his efficiency. Progressively, he was tagged as being inefficient by people who should have known better and others who did not, because the

media unfortunately advised them wrongly in that respect. The farmer took up the challenge and streamlined his operation to the point that it is now generally accepted that he has this efficiency, but his market has evaporated. He is caught in a Catch 22 situation, as it is called today. If he produces more, his position worsens. The Government has procrastinated, hoping that sooner or later the problem will disappear. Unfortunately, it persists.

The honorable member for Rodney clearly demonstrated in his speech that the Minister perhaps failed in his duty by not informing the Premier of the true position. It can be put as high as that. I am sure that at the recent important Premiers Conference, the Premier may have been prepared to take a broader view if he had been fully informed of the situation. I am not attacking the Minister unnecessarily. I believe some of the moves he mentioned or introduced in his Ministerial statement, such as the recounting of the items of assistance that were given from time to time, were legitimate and fair enough, but they are too little, too late. The problem was upon people before they recognized it.

The National Party is prepared to accept some of the recommendations that have been made, such as farm forestry loans 'and action by the Federal Government to reduce postal and telephone charges. The taxing system is not of much use to anyone when he is not making any money. There has been token support by way of freight concessions and so on, but it should be getting through to people that at present they are Pyrrhic victories because the farmers frankly cannot avail themselves of them.

The situation in the beef industry was deteriorating. The dairying industry had been running down for a long time. During that period the resources of the people in the industry had declined so that when the


situation reached a crisis, compounded by the present drought, dairy farmers were in a critical position very quickly. But we should not forget that the beef industry was, for a long period, undergoing great stress-for at least the past two or three years. It says a lot for the industry that it has been able to survive.

The beef industry is not in the headlines today, but the fortunes of the two industries are interwoven to some extent. Both of these industries should be restructured and tha,t is the effect of the amendment. As a responsible Parliament we should be setting out, on behalf of producers, recommendations to the proposed meat marketing authority on what could and should be done in the light of the knowledge which the Parliament and the department have.

The same could be said about the dairying industry, and the amendment covers both aspeots. These matters are of extreme importance to the people in the industries. The industries should be restructured so that they can face up to the problems confronting them and eventually move back to parity with the rest of the community. The position has deteriorated so much that it is becoming a social welfare situation. There are far too many people in this position on the land.

The Minister has spoken of such matters as a household support scheme. I gather that little has been done about this. In any case there is some woolly thinking about how such a scheme might be implemented. The Minister has claimed that this is an initiative which he adopted on behalf of the Victorian Government, but I do not think that is so. If any initiative can be claimed, it can be claimed by me. I direct attention to approaches I made to Senator Wreidt, who was then the Minister for Agriculture, in a letter dated 13th February, 1975. I stated-

I refer to the present crisis in the beef industry and statements which you have made indicating a desire to find appropriate ways of providing assistance.

Mr. Mclnnes.

For example, the manufacturing industry has been given assistance with wage support for industries affected by certain Government decisions. In addition income maintenance has been applied by the Department of Labour and Immigration to individuals retrenched from affected industries. While attaching no blame to your Government for the present plight of the beef industry, it must be remembered that predications of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics have painted a relatively glowing picture of the future of the beef industry, and consequently beef farmers embarked on a herd building up programme to meet an anticipated major demand by 1978.

The beef man's inability to market cattle at present prices means that evergrowing numbers must now be sustained on his property and the farmer finds himself in a position of working harder than ever before for little or no return. Many are unable to arrange carry on funds and are under considerable pressure to reduce existing overdrafts and borrowings and consequently can see little merit in getting into deeper water by borrowing under the 11· 5 per cent terms of the $20 million offer made by your Government.

The case for reduced interest is strong. but equally the need to provide a type of weekly sustenance over the crisis period not only to enable the beef producer and his family to meet their every day living costs, but to give him heart to applying energies to sustain the national beef asset.

That is important because we are talking about demoralized people.

If farmers (either farm managers, employees or owner operators) are reduced to a position where their farm operation has no future, they will leave the industry and in many cases become dependent upon the Government for support. Tha t is happening now.

In addition, the loss of quite real expertise needed to manage and operate farms of this nature will be permanently lost and total collapse of the beef industry may follow.

Unlike a manufacturer, who can quickly start or stop production and who can stockpile manufactured wares at little operational cost until markets improve, the farmer must maintain the increased number of cattle carried over and any build-up or reduction of herds is a prolonged exercise. I asked for a wage sustenance based on the basic wage and set out other reasons why I believe this should be provided.

This was taken up by Mr. Sinclair, who is now Minister for Primary Industry, and the Leader of the National Party, Mr. Doug Anthony. It was also

Ministerial Statement: [12 MAY~ 1976.] Rural Industries. 921

taken up by people who made submissions to the Industries Assistance Commission, and the proposals seemed to have seeped down to the Victorian Government. I am glad that they have, and I congratulate the Government on adopting an idea which I believe is intrinsically sound. It is not just a matter of social welfare; it is business acumen to sustain the national dairying industry and the national beef industry.

Both industries are of major importance to Victoria. Victoria produces something like half of the beef which is exported from Australia, and certainly the dairying industry in Victoria accounts for about 60 per cent or 70 per cent of Australia's production. So Victoria has two industries which need suppor,t, and it is simply good business for the Government to support them.

As was said by the honorable member for Keilor, this is a vital matter for country municipalities. They have already been hit by large increases in the cost of workers compensation premiums. A few months ago we had the ridiculous position that country municipalities were laying off permanent staff and employing people temporarily under the Regional Employment Development Scheme. What an absurd misuse of Government funds that was! Country municipalities are now denied the use of plant and equipment because funds are not available. They are being diverted into freeway operations with a greater priority than before. A crisis is coming up in country municipalities.

One cannot refuse to believe that the crisis is not affecting the retail area. A report in the Gippsland Times of 10th May, 1976, under the heading " Foards to cut prices ", stated-

A local store is launching a new price cutting policy from Wednesday next "to meet depressed local conditions".

With the current low returns for primary produce, and the continuing dry spell, Foards now felt it should substantially lower prices on many items to meet depressed local conditions, he said.

To enable Foards to achieve this, heavy cuts in operating expenses had been made and certain development projects postponed.

Foards was presently establishing a new buying office in the heart of the garment manufacturing area of Richmond, in the metropolitan area, and some members of Foards buying staff would be permanently based in that office to handle placement of their buying at lower prices.

So this eventually affects the metropolitan area, which cannot and should not be divorced from any crises in prices in the Sta.te. I had intended to say something about the correspondence in the file which the Minister kindly made available. However, I simply need to restate the fact that it cannot be said that the Federal Government had been wholly to blame for a dilatory approach to this problem. The State Government had a dilatory approach. The Minister of Agriculture and others concerned, such as the Minister for Conservation, probably believed that some of these matters did not come within the ambit of the Victorian Government, that they were Federal matters and that Viotoria could wash its hands of them. N ow ~ with the new tax -sharing arrangement, that situation has gone.

In future the State Parliament will be forced to take heed of primary industries. In this case they are mainly rural industries, but they are primary industries which sustain the development of secondary industry to the ultimate benefit of every Victorian and Australian. Yet we see such headlines as, "Dairy Knocked Out", and "Punch Looming".

I repeat that the Government's actions are a case of too little too late. There are no dynamic measures here. There has been too much procrastina tion and the Government has been merely fiddling with the problem. I appeal to the Minister and the Government to review the situation and, in concert with the Federal Government, to take a great forward step.

Mr. BURGIN (Polwarth): I compliment the Minister of Agriculture on his statement on rural problems. He has fairly put both the position


and the actions taken by the Government. We have listened for some time---possibly too long-to members of the Opposition-I classify members of the National Party as part of the opposition-overstating what has been said and what has not been said by the Minister. Although I could not hear all of what was said by the honorable member for Gippsland South, I thought his attitude was better than the whining attitude usually adopted by members of the National Party. That party says that everything must be done to help primary industry but it knocks every suggestion put forward. However, it does not succeed when it 'adopts this attitude.

On about 20th March of this year, the National Party said that it was committed to maintaining the prominent position of primary industry in Victoria. That is the known role of the National Party, and of all seven members of it who sit in this House. But primary industry is one of the most depressed sectors of the ec~nomy. This group of people always ~laIm that they look after primary mdustry but, of course, they do not. Let us ~e fair about this; the prob~ems WhICh are besetting our primary mdustries have not originated in Victoria and in many cases have not originated in Australia. They have arisen from decisions made overseas by the European Economic CommUt;ti~y against our products, and by decIsIOns made in Japan and the United States of America.

Some time ago the European Economic Community made a deliberate change in policy. It decided that instead of killing stock after one year it would carry the cattle until they were three years old before killing them. This meant that for a period there was a shortage of beef. Was this reported very strenuously in Australia during the time of the previous Federal Labor Government? Of course it was not, as nobody took a great deal of notice of this vital decision made by the European Eco-

Mr. Burgin.

monic Community, a decision which affected Victoria particularly and Australia as a whole.

That one decision affec ted two of our biggest rural industries. For a period there was a shortage of beef and Australia was able to sell its beef on the overseas markets. However, soon the stage was reached where the European Economic Community com'menced to kill its own animals. In doing so it was able to produce double or one-and-a-half times the poundage of meat that it had been producing previously. So Australia found that its meat exports were not so desperately needed, and because of economic conditions then prevailing all over the world this spelt catastrophe for the beef industry in this country.

The other thing which happened following the decision by the European Economic Community and which was not strenuously reported in Australia, was that because a greater poundage of beef was being produced from the animals, fewer calves were being rea'red. The European Economic Community had been rearing its ,calves on powdered milk and so commenced a build-up of powdered milk in Europe. There is a big storage of unused milk in Europe and as a consequence powdered milk has beoome a non-saleable product overseas, as has casein.

Let us be fair about these matters. These 'are p'roblems which the 'country is facing at present and which have resulted from decisions made by the European Economic Community, Japan and the United States of America. Combined with the economic conditions, these decisions have locked out our beef exports to those countries.

I have examined the rural policy of the Australian Labor Party-I have to put on my glasses to see it-and it covered about three paragraphs in the whole policy speech delivered during the last State election campaign. We cannot take much notice of this and there is no mention in the policy speech of marketing proposals which members of the Opposition have been advancing during this debate.


During the period I have been discussing, other things have been happening internally in Australia. A few years ago the previous Federal Government decided that the dairy farmer was farming too well and it decided to do away with the dairy subsidy, which had been a consumer subsidy. The subsidy had been of benefit to the dairying industry, but really it was of immense benefi t to the consuming public.

The previous Federal Labor Government also decided that our school children had no need to continue drinking free milk, and so that went by the board. These were vital decisions which had a bearing on the structure of the dairying industry. A further decision which was made at Federal level at that time was to take the superphosphate bounty from the primary producer. Probably that is the most dangerous thing that has ever happened, especially with the escalating price of superphosphate, in primary industries.

With those three things happening, and a drought developing in this State, a position was reached in which, because of low prices for dairy products and extremely low prices for cattle, dairy farmers and beef producers were unable to afford the cost of superphosphate and so neglected to spread fertilizers on their properties. Therefore, they have not had the feed they usually have growing. They have been unable to sell their cattle at a normal price bec'ause there has been no market. This position has built up within Victoria, and members of the National Party are trying to place the blame on the State Government. That is unfair.

Mr. WHITING: Does the honorable member believe the National Party cannot blame the Government or cri ti cize it?

Mr. BURGIN: I believe any Government should be open to receive constructive criticism, but what the House has heard today has been by no means constructive criticism. I have read articles written by members of the National Party which have

stated over and over again that the Government is not doing this or that, or, if the Government is doing something, it is not enough. However, I have never read in the press releases made by members of the National Party what it would do if it were in the same position. That party is always happy to claim that the Government is not doing something but it is not willing to say what it would do if it had the responsibility.

There is no need for me to repeat the items which the Minister of Agriculture has mentioned, but I reiterate tha t this Government has done more for primary industries in Victoria under these adverse conditions .than the Government of any other State in Australia has done for its primary industries, and I include States which have a Country Party or a Laoor Party Government.

The Victorian Government has initiated more proposals and implemented them, in some cases alone and in some cases jointly with its Federal counterpart, than the Federal Government has initiated. When I tried to find out what other State Governments or the Commonwealth Government had done alone, I found that the Federal Government had reintroduced the superphosphate bounty and investment loans. However, those two items have nothing to do with the current situation facing Victoria. The Federal Government acted alone in making those decisions, but in spite of the drought in Victoria and the problems confronting rural industries at this time, those decisions affect the problem only indirectly.

\Vhen examining the position in Tasmania, I found that the apple and pear industry has had made available to it $4 million for stabilization and an export subsidy. I have no knowledge of anything being made available for the beef or dairying industry.

In South Australia the price paid for wine grapes was raised by the South Australian Ministry, once again


acting in conjunction with the VictDrian Ministry. The VictoriaIi Minister of Agriculture had initiated discussions designed to' lead to greater stability within the industry. It was claimed to be a big deal fDr South Aust'ralia but it was the Victorian M'inister of Agriculture who initiated the discussiDns.

,Mr. HANN: What about New South Wales and Queensland?

Mr. BURGIN: Let us examine what is happening in Queensland under a National Party GDvernment or whatever it calls itself there. The Queensland Government will not even cDntribute to this vital dairying industry problem. This is the danger, as the Minister of Agriculture has said, of what could happen unless all States CDme into this scheme Df underwriting pDwderedmilk at $300 a tonne. It has been claimed by the Minister, and I agree with his claim, that this action could create a precedent, that in future if any primary industry got into trouble it could be "hit to leg" by a Federal GDvernment because of this costsharing precedent, and that the most any industry cDuld expect is what the poorest State cDuld afford. In Queensland, dairying prDbably plays no impDrtant part, but in Vi'ctoria it is an important primary industry; it is in a seriDus situation and the prDspects do not appear too bright for the future.

I hDpe note will be taken of submissions I have made on the proposed interim measure to operate until 30th June. What will happen after then? The Federal Government, in which the Minister fDr Primary Industry is a member Df the NatiDnal Country Party, has s'aid it cannot do much because the report will not be available until the end of August. It claims its hands are tied and that it would be difficult to take initiatives, but it is dealing with an export industry which is of vital importance to' this country.

The honorable member for BrDadmeadDws indicated that farmers should go Dn producing to feed the

hungry multitude. I submit that the Federal Government should make a clear statement on whether it wants every primary prDducer to go on prDducing because the primary producer cannot afford to stand the knocks he gets in endeavouring to do this. In Victoria one of the prDblems in primary industry has been the high production 'rates per acre and the efficiency of farmers. For many years the farmers in this State have kept pace with high inflationary trends by producing more and mDre per acre ; by milking bigger herds and by running 'more cattle per acre.

However, one of the greatest disservices experts in primary industry have done to' VictDrian farmers has been to suggest that they 'must chase higher prDduction targets per acre. While they are doing this and producing more cattle to the a'cre or milking bigger herds to the acre, they are running greater risks. Whenever they have a few weeks withDut rain they find themselves in severe drought situations because they a're stocking their properties to the limit. This would be all right if they were able to receive benefits from the sale of their prDducts without having to take additiDnal risks by stocking prDperties at the higher 'rates.

The time is coming when producers must start thinking of themselves and their families, and perhaps gO' back to the stage where they produced a magnificent animal, even at a low stocking rate. Even if there is a shortage Df food in this country, farmers may then 'receive a reasDnable price for their products without having a great capital investment but no return, as is the position today.

Mr. FOGARTY (Sunshine): The Opposition agrees with the amendment moved by the honDrable member fDr Gippsland SDuth. It alsO' welcDmes the Ministerial statement as a vehicle fDr discussing ratiDnally, and sanely I hDpe, an impDrtant subject.

I was surprised that the statement cDntained little reference to repDrts frDm the BDard of Inquiry intO' the

Ministerial Statement: [ 12 MAY, 1976.] Rural Industries. 925

Dairying Industry in Victoria. The Minister has had one report since 5th May last year and, when listening to the Minister, I expected that he would detail the action which the Government intended to take. Apparently, in the final analysis, the Minister will have three reports plus a supplementary report. Many of the recommendations had the endorsement of the Minister-I will not say of the Government-and the Minister should have initiated moves and informed Parliament what he intended to do about these recommendations. In this context, I am referring to liquid milk for household use.

Mr. WHITING: Do you think the Minister has been rolled over?

Mr. FOGARTY: I sincerely hope he has not because the Minister has made some definite statements about what he intended to do as a Minister at the national level. I trust that the honorable gentleman does not have feet of clay when the crunch really comes. I am pleased to note that, according to the Minister's statement, the honorable gentleman has woken up to the National Party at a Federal level.

The rural industries of Australia are Australia's most important export earners. At both Federal and State levels, it is accepted that the dairying industry is the most decentralized industry in Victoria and when the industry meets with the adversity that exists today, the whole economy of the State and the export earnings of the nation are seriously affected.

Honorable members have referred to the fact that Victoria has 14,000 dairy farmers. For some time, I represented an organization which had 3,000 employees working inside the milk industry and outside there were the milk carters, the drivers, the wharf labourers, and those employed in producing parchment and the cartons. Naturally, when an industry like that is in a serious situation,

many more thousands of people are affected than has been suggested during the debate.

The present situation is a combination of many factors and not merely a result of the drought. Drought is an act of God and on this occasion it is affecting practically the whole State at once and at a time when a surplus of stock exists mainly because many farmers kept the stock in anticipation-they did not anticipate a drought-that the good years of the past two years would continue. This contention is borne out by the figures provided by the Government Statist.

A further factor is the collapse of the export markets and even morethis has not been mentioned at length-the collapse in the prices paid on the export market. In one movement last year, the price for skim milk powder dropped by onethird.

Accordingly, a combination of these factors has led to a disaster. Undoubtedly, the industry is in a disastrous position and it is necessary to decide what should be done in Victoria as this State produces 60 per cent of Australia's milk products and 80 per cent of Australia's export market. The other States could not car.e less about Victoria's plight. The remaining 20 per cent of Australia's export markets is divided between the other States but the export market is predominately within Victoria and Tasmania. In these circumstances, the other States do not wish to participate in equalization plans, which means that the " Great Plan" of the Australian Dairy Corporation-I think they call it a plan-has not come to fruition because it has not been possible to obtain agreement between the various bodies and also between the States.

I intended to concentrate on exports and whether Victoria ought to be an export State. Some 15 years ago. about 120 milk factories operated in Victoria. This number has


been whittled away by amalgamations and mergers and now only twelve companies produce milk products in Victoria. In this context, I refer to companies and not factories.

In the area where the Minister of Agriculture lives, ten years ago approximately eight milk factories closed down within one month with the result that milk production was then centred around Koroit. Whilst the Australian Dairy Corporation and certain Federal authorities are suggesting rationalization of production, in order to maintain profitable production machinery costing many millions of dollars and capable of putting through 130,000 gallons of skim milk a day must be used. I emphasize skim milk because the closure of the small factories has led to manufacture being skim conc'entrated on that product, separated from cream. The skim is put through the sprays and comes out as skim milk powder. A factory with a small labour force can produce 130,000 gallons of skim milk powder in one day.

If the market for this product collapses overnight large stocks of skim milk will be floating around Victoria. Then, it will be necessary to decide whether it was wise to close all these factories in the past and concentrate our eggs in the one basket, namely the butter and the skim milk areas.

Today, 125,000 tonnes of skim milk powder is in storage and if it is not disposed of soon the product will deteriorate, and storage facilities will not be available for next year's production. When considering rationalization of the industry, thought must be given to the fact that Victorian factories must work to full capacity to produce the goods economically. If the volume is reduced the price will rise rapidly.

On the dairying industry, figures prepared by the Government Statistician indicate that in 1965, Victoria had 1·847 million dairy cattle; in 1970, 1·927 million; in 1973, 1·935

Mr. Fogarty.

million; in 1974, 1· 905 million; and in 1975, 1·916 million. Notwithstanding that the number of farms has decreased dramatically over ten years, the number of cows have increased dramatically. Undoubtedly, the farms are getting bigger and more efficient whilst the factories are becoming larger and more efficient also.

The Victorian Government has made representations to the Federal Government with a view to further subsidizing the industry. This action has been taken in overseas countries such as Canada. I mention Canada because I believe that country double-crossed Australia by dumping large quantities of milk powder on the open market. The Government should consider subsidizing the dairying industry to a far greater extent, particularly at this stage because 1 st July is D day for the present subsidies. The State Government should try to obtain further subsidies from the Federal Government for this industry.

Furthermore, the Minister should act immediately upon sections of the report of the Board of Inquiry into the Dairying Industry in Victoria. Moreover, it has to be decided whether Victoria should go flat out to obtain other export markets because our traditional markets have disappeared.

I disagree with the comments of the previous speaker concerning the supply of milk products to other countries. Only three or four years ago, Australia was feeding one country with bombs, but today I would rather see it being fed with skim milk powder bombs and show our humanity to man instead of acting as Christians on Sunday and heathens for the other six days of the week.

Returning to the local market, having decided whether Victoria is to be an export State, avenues are available in Victoria and Australia for some of our milk products. Members of the National Party have referred to the milk contract


system. The Minister has squibbed the issue because I have a document dated April, 1974, in which the company concerned states that the Minister is in favour of a milk contract system. If the Minister is not in favour of it, he must have been pressurized by some quarters and I suggest these may have been in the Gippsland area where the Minister for Social Welfare or someone else might have a farm. I believe pressure is coming fr.om the inner Gippsland area within 50 mil'es of Melbourne.

To further elaborate on this point, I refer to Hansard of 29th April, 1974, page 1680, and a question on notice which was asked by the honorable member for Rodney concerning liquid milk contracts. The answer indicates that in the Gippsland area the number of perSOns with milk contracts in the various categories are: Farms over 400 gallons, nil; 51-100 gallons, 419 farms; 101 to 200 gallons, 53 farms; and 201-300 gallons, 2 farms. In the Gippsland area the total number of farms is 2,663. In the Western District-and I sincerely hope the Minister takes note of this as he is a Western District cocky-1,629 farms, there are in northern Victoria 1,318, and in north-eastern Victoria 197. This shows that the milk contract system, as it is now, is one in which the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

I wonder what any farmer in the House would think-and I know there are some farmers apart from the Collins Street farmers -if three dairy farmers in the country had contracts, one for 200 gallons a day, another for 15 gallons a day, and the other for nothing. What a ridiculous situation! The inquiry into the dairying industry of Victoria recommended that there should be equal opportunity for all. Only recently there was what might be called "a minor revolt" in New South Wales where free milk was issued to people in the streets to highlight the subject. It is only

common decency and right that farmers who supply the same product, which is being picked up by one tanker from farms in the one lane, and going to the one factory in the country, should have equal contracts.

Mr. BIRRELL: A contractor has to supply for 365 days a year.

Mr. FOGARTY: As a voice in the background said, a contractor must supply 365 days in the year. The substantial milk factories which pick up the milk, and store it at a price at the factory base, obtain the supplies of milk from all over a specific area 365 days a year. I do not know of any milk factory that closes on any day of the year.

This paint was completely analysed by the inquiry into the milk industry. Recommendations which were made by that board of inquiry were adopted by mass meetings of farmers in the Western District and in northern Victoria. The only people screeching and screaming are those in the Gippsland area who are getting the lot. As an interjector would have said in his younger days, "Haul up the gangplank; I am on board ".

I believe also there is scope in the local market for the cheese industry. As a result of a question on notice last week the Minister supplied me with information that in Victoria in 1972-73 cheese imports totalled $4,497,118; in 1973-74 $4,785,105; and in 1974-75 $5,951,189; making a total over three years of $15,233,412. That is a rather substantial amount of cheese to import into Australia at a time when the country has an abundance of primary produce and is struggling for export markets. I believe the workers in the cheese manufacturing industry in Victoria are as good as any in the world. I also believe there are factories in Victoria capable of manufacturing cheese. Some of the factories in Victoria, such as the Snowy-MurrayGoulburn complex at Cobram, Kraft at Simpson, Nestles at Girgarre.

928 Ministerial Statement : [ASSEMBLY.] Rural Industries.

Perfect Cheese in Melbourne and smaller cheese manufacturers, can produce continental cheeses equal to any in the world. However, $15 million worth of cheese was imported into Australia in a three-year period.

What do the importers think of us as manufacturers and as milk producers? I have a copy of the minutes of a meeting with the Cheese Importers Association at the Australian Chamber of Commerce, Canberra, on 31st March, 1976. I hope I do not get shot for producing this. The minutes state--

The importers reported many areas of difficulty with Australian cheeses and gave many reasons for importing cheeses and these included-

( 1) Quality is far higher.

That is a lot of bunkum-(2) Quality is far more regular. (3) Demand for the imports is regular. (4) Several types are not produced in Aus-

tralia. (5) Imports come in better packs and

better presentation. (6) Local deliveries are unreliable. (7) Dealings with local manufacturers and

the industry are difficult.

The summary reads-Implications given and points to be dis

proved or clarified appear to be-l. Australian cheeses are of poor and

variable quality and the supply is unreliable. 2. Dealing with the industry and Cheese

Board is unreasonably difficult; engaging in export is virtually impossible.

3. The importers would handle more Australian cheese and engage in export if problems can be lessened.

Of course, Australia put a quarantine on imported cheese. Why did not Australia act as America did when it put restrictions on our beef industry? Australia imposed restrictions on cheese imports on the pretence that foot-and-mouth disease was prevalent in certain countries, but if that is correct, I wonder what the factories are like. The factories could be dirty dumps or hovels, but we do not know whether that is so. All we know is that there is a possibility of foot-and-mouth disease. I suggest to the Minister that he take up the matter with his Federal colleague in

Mr. Fogarty.

Canberra. I thought the Minister would get the khyber after what he said about him yesterday, but he can approach him and ask that a stiff tariff be put on overseas cheeses because Australia has the know-how and ability to manufacture cheese here. If the Minister approached the dairy division of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization I am certain that the officers could inform him of the methods of manufacture of some of the cheeses that are imported from overseas. Camembert cheese is manufactured at Moe, and I believe it is equal to the best in the world. It is a good type of Camembert, and the blue cheese which is manufactured at Girgarre is also good. It should be possible to eliminate the $15 million imports of cheese into this country.

The other point which I have mentioned to the Minister in debate previously is that there is an opportunity for a dairy co-operative or co-operatives to enter the liquid milk field in Victoria. At this stage there is one giant, and he has friends. Outside the metropolitan area companies are producing liquid mUk for home consumption. For example, the Moe co-operative, the MurrayGoulburn Co-operative Co. Ltd's factory at Koroit, and a factory at Camperdown are producing milk for the home market but they cannot ~et into the metropolitan market. The Government believes in free enterprise, and in view of the fact that the greater source of supply for home deliveries is drying up I believe the Minister should do all in his power to see that the co-operative dairies or the farmer-owned co-operatives are given a licence to operate in Melbourne.

Mr. BIRRELL: That is already sewn up in contracts.

Mr. FOGARTY: That is a ridiculous thing for the honorable member to say. It is not sewn up in contracts. Milk from Camperdown is transported to Melbourne by tanker.


I was surprised that the Minister made no reference to the Newmarket sale-yards in his statement.

Mr. WHITING: Yes, he did. It is in the Liberal Party's policy.

Mr. FOGARTY : I am talking about the report. I may have missed it, but I do not think I did. I am lucky that my colleague, the honorable member for Melbourne, is not present in the Chamber, but I do believe there should have been some definite reference to the Melbourne city abattoirs. It is of interest to me because the Government is trying to dump the sale-yards in my electorate, and I object strongly to the proposal. I would rather see them located in the electorate of Kew. Propositions have been put to the Minister, and I hope his reply will be favourable from my point of view and from the point of view of the people in the electorate of Sunshine. I thought the Minister would have made reference to such a large project in his Ministerial statement.

Mr. BORTHWICK (Minister for Conservation): I want to participate in the debate more in general terms than in specific terms. As the debate has progressed it has tended to become confined to the special interests of individual members, or with the special problems associated with electorates rather than with the industry as a whole. I feel that one of the great tragedies in the debate to date has been the attitude expressed by the two members of the National Party.

One of the problems that Ministers of this State have encountered in recent years when attending Australian Ministerial conferences has been that at least from the beginning when Senator Wriedt was chairman-and it is continuing now-the Federal Government has approached the meetings with preconceived plans, and placed those plans in front of State Ministers with an attitude of take it or leave it. I hoped that with the advent of Mr. Sinclair as Minister for Primary Industry,

following the election of a new Government in Canberra, some of the earlier attitudes may have changed.

I sat as an observer with our Minister of Agriculture at the Agricultural Council meeting when the States were confronted with a programme that had obviously been agreed on before the council met. I suggest that to the men representing the States with a keen interest in this industry the council meeting was in no way a conference. Any suggestion that there was a conference is hogwash. As an observer, it was obvious. to me that Victoria had to take a hne that it did not support at one stag~. Our representative had to say, ID effect, "Victoria will have no bar at all of the scheme" to try to get the Federal Government to a conference table.

When I asked the Minister in charge whether any of the points were negotiable the answer was " No ". That related to the payment of $250 a tonne on skim milk powder. A little straight talking is needed, not the shenanigans that honorable members have been hearing from the corner party. It seems to be the intention of the National Party to make political capital out of this matter and to cover up some of the attitudes emanating from Canberra. As a Minister who attended that conference and a person whose family associations have been with adverse conditions in rural industry, I am not prepared to listen to this humbug.

The practice started with Senator Wriedt of Ministers being told there was to be no negotiation. The same thing occurred with the Australian Agricultural Council in relati!ln ~o the dairying industry. If VIctOrIa backed by the Labor State .of Tasmania-the two States WIth the greatest interest in the dairying industry-had not taken the hard line that it did at that conference it would not have received the $300 a tonne and the money would have been provided on a dollar for dollar basis.


The two States dug their toes in and fought hard. If that had not been done the dairy farmer would not have received one additional cent in his pocket. That information ought to be placed on record and real credit should be given to the Minister of Agriculture for his determination and courage despite the fact that in country newspapers in Victoria he was being attacked and suggestions were being made that he could win marks by backing off. In that fight the Government did not always have the support of members representing the country areas of this State that the dairying industry warranted.

I shall elaborate a little further on that point. I was disappointed to hear the honorable member for Rodney and the honorable member for Gippsland South trying to establish that the responsibility for real support of rural export industries in Australia rested with the State. Any member of this House who reflects on the vagaries and fortunes of rural industry in Victoria and its history will know that real support for that industry can emanate only from the one area-Canberra. Canberra has the constitutional responsibility, the financial resources and the moral responsibilities to back up the marketing corporations that it brings into power, and it controls export marketing and marketing procedures. I am speaking of the future of the great rural exporting industries of Australia and I do not believe it behoves any political party to try to make short-term capital gain from the problems that exist today. If they accept the proposal that support for the rural industries must be limited to the State or the proportion that the State can contribute they could easily jeopardize the future of the great rural industries.

A new proposal developed in relation to beef when the States were confronted with a scheme whereby they had to provide dollar for dollar. The rule for obtaining any money

Mr. Borthwic1~.

from Senator Wriedt under the beef scheme was that the maximum loan to carry on in beef would be $10,000 and if the State was not prepared to accept that, nothing would be provided by the Commonwealth. Honorable members should be aware of that information. These so-called Ministerial conferences are no longer conferences. The honorable member for Gippsland South has talked about household support. That was one of the strongest points put by Victoria to the Australian Agricultural Council.

Mr. HANN: Prove it.

Mr. BORTHWICK: The honorable member should wait until he reads the minutes. On the question of household support through carryon loans, what argument was presented by Victoria? Victoria argued that if a carry-on loan was granted and the man concerned ultimately left the industry as a result perhaps of some rationalization scheme that Sir John Crawford might have brought forward, or something of that nature. the loan should be nonrepayable. Yet suggestions are made here by the members of the National Party because they have some kind of tenuous grapevine out of Canberra that le<1ds them to believe they know, before details are published, what goes on in Ministerial councils at which they are not in attendance. They even come to Ministers of this House and try to tell them what goes on.

To take the view that future support for major export industry must be dependent on either a 50-50 deal or a 2 for 1 deal between the States and the Commonwealth, at a time when the new Commonwealth-State financial arrangements are not yet absolutely clear, is disastrous for the future of rural industry. Yet this has been preached here tonight by two members of the National Party.

They then say that the States are not interested in anything. Ask the Leader of the National Party what


this Government initiated in his electorate in relation to canneries and the price set by the Fruit Industry Sugar Content Committee. Who went to the honorable members' electorate and talked to the people until 1 a.m. in an endeavour to find a compromise situation that would be acceptable to growers, to canners and the co-operatives? I obtained the compromise situation and then took it to Sydney to the Minister for Primary Industry and sold it to him. It was far more advantrugeous than the recommendation ma\de by his own department. Further, this Government that is chided by members of the National Party tlhen funded the whole amount, Corl1monwealth and State, to the canneries in that area before the Commonwealth even passed legislation to legalize the scheme.

To hear members of the House who preach the interests of rural industry talk in a manner that demonstrates they are more interested in day-to-day political advantage than in the general long-term interests of rural industry frightens me as a person with a rural background. I believe they have no real interest other than a short-term interest in rural industry. If they had they would be joining the Government in its fight for better deals in Canberra than have been achieved so far.

Mr. B. J. EVANS (Gippsland East) : It has been most interesting to note the way in which this debate has developed and how it had its origin. I very much regret that the debate has been turned by back-benchers of the Liberal Party and now by the Minister into a hymn of hate against the National Party for raising a vital and relevant fact last week. That fact led to the introduction by the Minister of a factual Ministerial statement to which the honorable gentleman presumably gave considerable thought and for which he undertook considerable research. However, not one member of the Government has denied the claim that

has been made by the honorable member for Rodney and repeated by the honorable member for Gippsland South regarding a report that appeared in the Age of Saturday last under the headline "Fourteen million dollars leap in State bill for farmer aid". The article stated, inter alia-

But then the Premier received a telex from the Prime Minister saying that the total cost of the scheme would be about $68 million which will make Victoria's share about $18 million.

The nub of the argument which has been raised by the National Party in this debate is that the statement is blatantly untrue and neither the Minister nor anybody else within the ranks of the Government has yet been prepared to say that it is untrue. Members of the National Party would like verification or a denial of the statement. They believe verification can be obtained from the files which the Minister has made available to them, and also from the Minister in Canberra. Surely if the Government has all the nous and expertise that it claims to have, it will not take it long to check the figures because they are detailed in the telex which goes to some trouble to explain the system under which this scheme will operate. It should not take more than a few minutes to check that, especially with the aid of a calculator.

The telex points out in some detail that even if it does not receive any return for the skim milk powder yet to be sold, the most the Victorian Government could be up for is approximately $9,000. How on earth could this statement be justified? That is the question raised by the National Party. It is a relevant point on which the party is entitled to seek confirmation.

I mentioned earlier the vitriolic attack made on the National Party by Government back-benchers in this debate. It is relevant to the present situation. I agree with a number of remarks by the honorable member for Polwarth, particularly in regard to the


impact of the European Economic Community. Anybody who ignores that question does not understand the full ramifications of the p'roblem.

One of the honorable member's comments that I agree with is that the National Party is identified with the farming scene. It has been for many years. The attacks on the National Party which have been made over the years by rural back-benchers in the Liberal Party have been a major contributing factor to the division which has been created between country and city. The vast majority of people in the city ·could not care less what happens to people in the rural areas.

Only in the past couple of weeks the daily press has realized that people are living in the country and at present are sorely tried financially. Over the years it has been most noticeable that the daily press is only too ready to take up any criticism they can find about what is happening in rural areas. How often does one read about the subsidy paid to the dairying industry? This was taken as evidence that the dairying industry was inefficient. Time and time again the "experts" have told the dairy farmers that they should get into other activities. It was sufficient evidence that a subsi<;ly was paid to the dairying industry.

The opportunity was taken at every opportunity to attack the superphosphate bounty. Attacks were made on the rural industries for taxation concessions which, as I mentioned last week, were not especially designed to help the farmer. All these concessions and subsidies were specifically introduced because this nation needed to improve its balance of payments situation and the only thing this country could produce at that time was primary production. We had to have primary exports to increase our balance of payments.

No real thought was given to the future of primary industries. When Britain decided to enter the European Economic Community insufficient regard was taken of the effects that

Mr. B. J. Evans.

move would have. It was blithely said, "Just give us a couple of years and we will find more markets".

I ·concede that the Federal branch of my party has a lot to answer for in this regard and I have told it so in years gone by, but that does not alter the situation that 'confronts us today. We want some real assistance. The purpose of this motion and of this debate is to draw the attention of the Government to the fact that in the sphere of the State Government's operation there are things that it can do if it has the will. It is not necessary to help out specifically rural export industries or to subsidize the export of primary p~oducts.

There are many fields in which the State Government can take action to assist the people in 'rural industries which are well and truly within its province if the Government is prepared to find the money. That is the whole question, whether the Government considers the problem urgent enough and serious enough to be prepared to cut down expenditure in some other directions in order to help primary industry. I suggest that that will not happen.

The Melbourne City Council and the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works have been relieved from the payment of considerable sums of money by the Government taking over the responsibility of those two bodies towards the cost of the l\IJelbourne underground rail loop, a project wh!ch was entered into with the full a~reement of those two bodies. The Government fell over backwards so rapidly to help the Melbourne City Council that the council did not even know it had got this bonanza.

The argument of the National Party is that if the Government can find funds to help the Melbourne City Council and the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works it can help the rural municipalities by saying that if a producer cannot afford to pay his rates they can be deferred until conditions improve.


This would be a real form of assistance. It is useless claiming that municipal councils have the power to do this because the council still has to carry on its functions. If it defers the rates, it is only the people who are affected who have to carry the burden. That is one proposition which the Government should examine. The Government should inform rural municipalities that if because of the current financial situation any farmers are unable to pay their rates, it will compensate the councils for any remission or deferment of rates until such time as there is an improvement in the rural industries.

Another point the Government could consider is the question of freight rates in rural areas. After all, the farmers still have to buy groceries and the basic human needs and most of these have to be transported to the rural areas at high freight rates. If the Government can find the funds to subsidize transport in the city-not because the people cannot afford to pay the fares but to encourage the use of public transport-surely it can find funds to subsidize freight rates in rural areas to help the people living in those areas.

The Government could help in another tangible way. It could put up its money, but whether it will do so is the big question. I suggest that it is far more likely that it will find some money to spend on the Regent Theatre than on the propositions I have put forward.

Another step which should be taken with direct reference to the dairying industry is the withdrawal by the Government of the charge it imposes on dairy farmers who have recently installed refrigerated bulk milk vats. I regard this as the most iniquitous charge ever imposed by a government anywhere. It charges dairy farmers up to $1,000 simply because they have installed a refrigerated bulk milk vat with a motor of a certain horse-power. This oc-

curs even when the State Electricity Commission has no work to do. The Government is making the dairy farmers pay for a service which they do not receive. The only work which the State Electricity Commission is required to do concerning the installation is to inspect the work of the electrician who has connected the equipment to the power supply. This would take about five minutes, yet some dairy farmers are being charged $1,000 for that privilege by a Government which claims it is interested in the primary producer. It is so much nonsense and all the histrionics of the Minister for Conservation cannot get him off the hook as he was a member of the committee which was responsible for this iniquitous decision.

I could refer to many things of this nature but I have mentioned only a few in response to the challenge to the National Party to name some of the things Jthe National Party would do if it had the opportunity. It will be to the regret of many people in rural areas that the National Party is not in a position to put these policies into effect. The policies would provide a direct benefit to the rural areas; they are not like the airy-fairy intentions that have been announced by Government supporters tonight. The Government has been at pains to absolve itself from any real responsibility for the present situation.

Over the years honorable members have heard successive Liberal Governments claim sole credit for the prosperity, development and advancement of this State. However, if it intends to claim credit for the bridges it builds, it should also accept responsibility for those which fall down. Of course, the Government will not accept responsibility for the bridges which have fallen down. It should share responsibility for the situation which is besetting the rural areas at present.

Mr. STEPHEN (Ballarat South): I regret that the debate has become a parochial discussion. There has been


too much concentration on the dairying industry which all honorable members agree is suffering severely at this time. This is an opportunity to analyse the problem to ascertain where it lies and how it came about. I do not intend to allow the Australian Labor Party off the hook on that point.

The main problems confronting our primary industries are inflation and unemployment. There has been a world recession in primary industry following decisions made by the European Economic Community, the United States of America and Japan, and it is those countries which have been the main purchasers of our primary products.

The dry season which is almost verging on a drought has also caused problems and in addition we are still suffering severely from the economic mismanagement of the former Federal Labor Party Government. That Government introduced a number of tariff cuts which were supposedly to assist the rural producers but which in actual fact were counter-productive and reacted unfavourably 'against rural communities. I link rural communities with rural industries because both have been affected by the problems to which I have referred.

During the debate little has been said about the beef 'and wool producers or the fat sheep producers, although their time of crisis will not be far away in many instances if the current conditions continue. Not one word has been said about the grain producer because conditions are favourable at the moment for the production and sale of grain. However, that position could change very quickly.

I cannot accept the noble gesture or the offer of the honorable member for Keilor who tonight asked the House to conduct the debate purely on a non-political basis, although I agree wholeheartedly with him. If a solution could be reached,

Mr. Stephen.

every honorable member would be in agreement and would wholeheartedly support it.

lt is not easy to find a solution but nevertheless it is pertinent to keep the record straight. The honorable member for Keilor quite correctly quoted the rural policy of the Australian Labor Party in 1972 which was to the effect that positive leadership must be given when issues first emerge. That is a noble statement with which all honorable members would agree. Nevertheless, it is a difficult proposition and not one which can always be followed.

When I referred to rural comnlunities I had in mind the damage which has been done over the past three or four years in undermining the whole rural community, particularly in the field of unemployment and the discontinuance of assistance and co-operation between rural industries and rural communities. Of course, honorable members are aware of the tariff cuts which produced unemployment in the textile, footwear and electrical manufacturing industries -all actions which were deliberately taken by the previous Federal Labor Government, and which showed a complete disregard for the well-being of rural communities. In the Sun News-Pictorial of 5th June, 1974, the then Deputy Prime Minister, Dr. Cairns, was reported as saying that textile workers and clothing industry workers would not be hurt by production cuts caused by tariff changes. The Federal Minister went on to elaborate. This was one of the bases of the rural setback.

Again, on 18th July, the newspapers carried the headline cc Jobless Figure Minor". I am quoting only the headlines but I have the full reports. This is when the rot set in and when the whole rural wellbeing began to be undermined. The Opposition in this House cannot escape completely some involvement in its Federal party's policies.

Ministerial Statement: [12 MAy, 1976.] Rural Industries. 935

In his policy speech in 1972, Mr. Whitlam stated-

We will stand ready to co-operate with the States in supporting the regional development plans they have already announced. Our first help for the State programme will be to implement, for all States, the recommendation of the Victorian Decentralization Committee that centres nominated for accelerated development be recognized for telephone charging purposes as extensions of the metropolitan area, whereby rentals would be equated and calls between these places and the capital charged as for local calls.

It is now history that charges were increased by 40 per cent, 60 per cent and even more. I stress these matters because they are important and were instrumental in undermining the lifestyle, the well-being and the general prosperity of rural communities and rural industries.

Also in 1972, the Labor Party policy statement supported the provision of adequate funds for longterm loans to farmers. Such a scheme would probably overcome 50 per cent of the problems of rural industry for the next 25 years if any Government were prepared to put it into effect. Mr. Whitlam went on to promise long-term finance and eventually it was made available at the magnificently low interest rate of 11 ·25 per cent!

I do not wish to quote too extensively because it can be boring, but it is important that these matters are put on the record. When we are looking for ways of correcting problems, it is as well to face up to how we got into the problem. Although nobody in his right mind would try to sheet home all rural problems to the former Federal Labor Government, one cannot dissociate that Government or take any blame from it for the serious mismanagement during its three-year term.

The honorable member for Keilor mentioned that the Governor's Speech contained only six lines dealing with agriculture. The honorable member conveniently did not mention that in the Supply Bill which was passed by this House last week there were eight lines relevant to

this subject and that $13 million was appropriated for use by the Department of Agriculture on extension services and salaries during the period 1st July to 20th November.

Very few suggestions have been made on how to overcome the serious problem. I state without equivocation that rural industry needs low-interest money on a longterm basis. By low interest, I mean 3 per cent or 4 per cent interest on loans for 20 or 25 years. Of necessity, the farming industry needs loans spread over 20 years because it takes that long to budget properly. This would solve most of the problems in our rural industries and obviate the necessity for short-term subsidies which each Government in turn is under pressure to supply from time to time when seasonal conditions go against the rural community.

It is necessary to upgrade the marketing of primary produce. The present system is outdated. What was good enough 100 or 120 years ago is not necessarily the way the produce should be marketed today.

In the short term, a rural relief scheme should be brought into being again very soon because the previous scheme operated on a reasonable basis, with low cost of management, and produced longstanding benefits which the rural community needed and from which they will benefit for many years to come.

The Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of Lands have cooperated in presenting a case to the Federal Government for assistance to rural communities and rural industries at large. In this instance, their efforts have been focused towards the dairying industry, which is suffering so severely at present.

Victoria has a major problem-on its hands in overcoming the rural situation and what to do with surplus stock and how to market them. The solutions to the problem should exercise the minds of members of all

Ilrgislutinr 1\ssrmhly. - Parliament of Victoria

Documents

Transcript of Ilrgislutinr 1\ssrmhly. - Parliament of Victoria