Laurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The ABC religious program Compass recently gave the wider Australian electorate perhaps their first knowledge of the Mandeans. They are, of course, an ancient religious group from the Middle East, Mesopotamia, although they might have moved there from another place at an earlier time. They are regarded as the last Gnostics, people who essentially see knowledge as their main source of salvation. They put John the Baptist on a higher plane than Islam or Christianity in their pantheon of religious sources.

In 2003 there were estimated to be 60,000 to 70,000 of them essentially in Iraq and to some degree Iran. In the words of Nathaniel Deutsch in the 7 October 2007 New York Times article:

The United States did not set out to eradicate the Mandeans, one of the smallest, oldest and least understood of the many minorities in Iraq. This extinction in the making has simply been another unfortunate and entirely unintended consequence of the invasion of Iraq.

I am not for a moment saying that justification of Iraq intervention is either for or against it premised on that, but it is one of the outcomes. Although they were subject to persecution from time immemorial there is no doubt that the increased religious enmities within Iraq and the association perhaps of them as being more Western than other religious groups has led to particular problems for them, to the point where they face extinction.

It is worth noting that as of today, in contrast to that figure of 2003, there is regarded as being barely 7,000 of them still in Iraq and perhaps 5,000 to 10,000 in Iran. As with many minorities in Iran, you would not be certain of the figures because of the hostility of the religiously based theocratic regime to all minorities. Importantly, in the Western world, Australia is now regarded, after Sweden, as being their main homeland. It is estimated that 3,500 currently reside here.

It is worth stressing a point that I have perceived of them in dealing with them that came out of the Compass program. I will go back and say that my first dealings were going to exhibitions at Liverpool Museum of their silverwork, goldwork and also, as with the speaker after me, in being associated with them in regards to refugee cases. What came out of that Compass program is a really strong emphasis which we see with all diasporas in this country but I think is particularly strong with them, and that is the way in which they themselves put it in the Compass program. Whilst they very much wish to retain a very ancient religion and the particularities of it, they have a very strong sentiment of integration. Having been to their New Year events, it is quite amazing. Unless you listen to the music and the singing, you could very clearly be at a very Anglo-Australian festivity. Also, the way in which their children incorporate themselves in the government school system and very much the way in which large parts of the community strongly intimate the need for integration.

An unidentified refugee in an article in the Swedish publication Religion and Ethics News Weekly stated:

We would like to propagate our faith to the children, but we live here and would also like to integrate into society.

That is very much the slant of this group.

This resolution aims firstly, to emphasise the continuing particular crisis they face in Iraq. As I have said, it is fairly pronounced. One of the aspects that is very important is that they cannot relocate. Indisputably, every minority in Iraq faces grave difficulties, but in regards to the Mandeans their very small numbers make relocation internally extremely difficult, and at the same time their language, a form of Aramaic, and their beliefs are singular. If we are talking about diversity in the world, if we are talking about preserving historical aspects that matter to us, they have an enhanced case on those fronts.

They are subject to kidnapping, straight-out religious intolerance and murders. They are subject to kidnappings because of the perception of their income levels. They religiously are obliged not to carry weapons. They are pacifists, so there is no possibility of self-defence and so on.

Another point in regard to migration and refugee policy in this country is that if we have an intake that is totally driven by boats, planes and rather opinionated lawyers, it does not give the government of the day the possibility of making sure that this country does, indeed, protect very vulnerable minorities. You cannot basically have boats deciding what the intake will be. They will all come at one time from Afghanistan or at another time Sri Lanka and still have a policy which preserves the diversity of the intake and gives the government of the day, Labor or Liberal, the possibility of fashioning an intake around who is regarded by the United Nations as being particularly vulnerable. That is another reason that I am raising this resolution. Obviously there have been times when some Mandeans have entered by boat as well. There is no disputing that. But predominantly they have entered in the refugee humanitarian intake. I constantly have cases involving their community. Very few weeks go by without people coming to my office and to a lesser extent that of the member for Fowler, because their predominant location in Sydney is the Liverpool municipal area. Dr Mtashar and other groups are based there. They have had very strong historical support from the Liverpool Multicultural Centre, which has allowed them to develop an organisation, community building and so on.

I would like to quote an article by Murthard Ababistani in a University of Malaya paper. It states:

Mandeans have been living in Iraq and Iran for over two millennia. During these centuries they have been a small ethnic group surrounded by the non-Mandean people and under the threat of identity elimination. This situation inevitably made their group identity protection one of their main concerns.

It is further commented:

The concern for identity protection still persists among the Mandean diasporas. However, the new social environment opens up new opportunities that affect both the religious practice and identity politics of the Mandeans.

Furthermore:

In the homeland, 'the religious' and 'the social' were unified and inseparable. The constant threat of ethnocide and the priority of identity protection had confined the Mandeans within their petrified religious rituals as the main reference of their identity. Living in secular and multicultural society a secularisation trend in the sense of separation among the Mandean community of Australia is observable. The Mandeans follow their social interest such as group identity and integrity through their secular association and organisations.

What that writer said is clearly happening in this country at the moment. It came out in that Compass program and it has been evidenced in my dealings with the community. They are very much now about incorporating into this society, being involved in community organisations beyond their own community. Also Australia has in a sense affected to some degree religious practices. It was very interesting in that program to see the way in which the requirement that they baptise, which is central to their beliefs, is now being carried out for the first time in areas other than rivers. This is causing some angst in the community, but it is seen as a practical reaction of young people not being very attracted to what they regard as polluted rivers being the source.

I am pleased to have the opportunity here today to put forward the argument that this country should be vigilant about continued abuses to this minority in Iraq and other minorities as well, that our foreign affairs department should make sure it takes up these issues, that this should inform government policy in regards to the refugee humanitarian intake, that we should be mindful that here today—not yesterday, not last week, not six years ago—we see evidence of persecutions of minorities, and that when we do have consideration of what countries or groups do get priority that they remain important in the forefront of consideration by Australia.

Philip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

(

I am not involved in this matter because I have constituents who are Sabean Mandeans. I have spoken in debates on matters involving religious minorities in Iraq raised by the member for Fowler, Mr Hayes. I did that on 30 May. In the context of that speech I also canvassed the situation relating to the Sabean Mandeans.

I think it is important to understand their very unique position in the world. It is a fact that they have been identified as the only surviving group representing the ancient Mediterranean movement known as Gnosticism, discovered by Western scholars in the 17th century, and the community survives in Iraq and Iran. The numbers in Iraq referred to and identified in the US State Department documentation dealing with religious minorities in Iraq estimates the size of the Sabean Mandean community varies, but 3,000 to 7,000 are now estimated to remain in-country, reduced from something of the order of 50,000 to 60,000 that were there in 2003. Of course, the UNHCR has also paid some regard, noting that in the refugee cases of Iraqis living outside of the country something of the order of three per cent were Sabean Mandeans. A similar report in relation to Iran reveals the numbers of people estimated to be Sabean Mandean is 5,000 to 10,000 persons residing in Kundistan, south-west of Iran.

Of course these people are descendants of those who are seen to have been the remaining followers of John the Baptist. But it has been noted that the origin is somewhat obscure. They appear to have originated in Palestine as a sect in the first century BC and they apparently absorbed material including the practice of baptism that had been begun by John the Baptist and early Christians.

It is a significant and unique community and one that I have been focused on from my earlier days as a minister for immigration and multicultural affairs. I was responsible in part for ensuring that within our programs for resettlement from the Middle East places were found for Sabean Mandeans. I have come to know a number of them, not as constituents, but the most interesting one is one that I find established a silver business in Liverpool, probably in the electorate of the member, nearby. He was quite an interesting man. You will now find him in the Gold Souk, Dubai as well. He has established premises there under the name Aussie Mike ' s and has been able to identify a unique niche linking his profession with the needs of the people who travel in that part of the world.

I did want in this debate to endorse the comments made by the member who spoke. In previous debates I have said that I am not desirous of seeing an evacuation of all of the Christians from the Middle East, even though many of them are under enormous pressure. That is of interest in relation to the Copts in Egypt that are now under significant pressure again. It is of interest particularly to the Syrian populations and the Chaldeans in Iraq, but it is also of interest to many of the orthodox followers in that region. I must say the Middle East Council of Christian Organisations has made the point that there needs to be a continuing presence of Christians in the Middle East. I do not know that the same can be said in relation to the Sabean Mandeans. I think it is part of the area in which they have obviously been brought up, but I think the size of the groups is such that they are enormously vulnerable.

There is a paper that is a little dated, November 2009, prepared by the Mandean Human Rights Group; it was their annual report. It is quite an interesting document because it outlines something of the demography and the history of the Mandeans. Honourable members who want to interest themselves in the matter might care to obtain a copy. I am happy to table this document when I have ceased referring to it, but it does go on to make the point that there is for the Sabean Mandeans the threat of extinction. When you take into account the very small number of Mandeans dispersed over a large number of countries as refugees, unless they have policies like we do that respect diversity and encourage people to maintain something of their history and their culture, in many other parts of the world they may find it difficult to survive. I am not saying that even where you have a tolerant society like we do that they may not be under a very significant threat even here in Australia.

What I found particularly challenging in reading the document was something of the plight that the community continues to suffer because they do outline in this particular report something of the experience that the Mandeans are facing in Iraq and Iran in particular. What you have in this document is the list of names of Mandeans murdered in 2003 and 2004. Looking at the documents, there were 18 in 2003, 34 in 2004 and 64 in 2005. When you continue through the documents you find that by the time we reach something of the order of 2009 there are named in total 163 people who have been murdered.

Similarly, the report includes lists of those people who have been kidnapped. Equally the numbers are of very considerable and real concern. There are the documented names of 271 Mandeans that had been subjected to kidnapping. Then you move to those who are threatened and assaulted and what you find is that there are recorded something of the order of 238 names of people who have been the subject of threats and assaults. With rape there are the names of 11 Mandeans. Of those who have been forced to conversion it is something of the order of 33. Those who have faced forceful displacement—and again the numbers are quite significant—and other forms of incidents have also been identified. What I think is significant is the relatively large numbers of people who have suffered in those ways in a population which is little more than several thousand people.

It gives you some idea of the enormity of the risks that they face and the threats that they are under. I think Australia does need to continue to keep the Mandeans very much in mind in the Refugee Resettlement Program. These are people who can be brought to Australia through the front door.

Yvette D'Ath (Petrie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for the debate has expired. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Burmese Community in Australia

Debate resumed on the motion by Ms Owens :

That this House:

(1) recognises:

(a) the important contribution of the Burmese community in Australia;

(b) the strength of the Burmese community and professional organisations and the part they have played in assisting others to settle successfully in Australia; and

(c) the extensive charity work of the Burmese community in Australia for the broader Australian community; and

(2) acknowledges the Burmese community ' s:

(a) strong advocacy over the plight of the Burmese refugees in the region; and

(b) determination to raise awareness of the difficult situation facing internally displaced people in Eastern Burma.

Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

(

At the 2006 census 53.9 per cent of the Burma-born aged 15 years and over had some form of higher non-school qualifications compared to just lower than that, 52.5 per cent, of the Australian population. Also, among Burma-born people aged 15 years and over the participation rate in the labour force was nearly 60 per cent and the unemployment rate was 5.3 per cent, comparable to the rest of the Australian population. At the 2006 census the estimated rate of Australian citizenship was 91.6 per cent, compared to 75 per cent for all overseas-born immigrants. That is a truly remarkable figure which is a testament to the incredible level of integration this community has undergone in such a short period of time.

I have a very strong Burmese community in my electorate. Like the Burmese communities spread around Australia they are vibrant, energetic and add value to the social fabric of my electorate. I have attended numerous functions and events held by the community but I would like to make special note of the Burmese Medical Association who have worked tirelessly to further the Burmese cause in Australia, including a fundraising dinner to support those affected by the tragic cyclones which hit Burma in 2008 and 2010.

Burma is among the poorest countries in South East Asia with almost one-third of its 50 million people living in poverty. Burma ' s development remains severely constrained by a lack of progress towards real democracy, economic reform and improved service delivery. Ongoing conflict has resulted in refugee populations fleeing to neighbouring countries with estimates of between 500,000 and up to one million people internally displaced. As it stands now, millions of Burmese people are unable to access food, basic healthcare, clean water or education for their children. The situation is particularly bad in eastern Burma where child mortality rates under five are nearly double Burma ' s national average and women are three times more likely to die from pregnancy or childbirth.

The Australian Burmese community are strong advocates for aid and as Australians their contribution to their homeland is significant. Australia recognises the immense development task faced by current and future generations of Burmese. For this reason, Australia ' s aid to Burma has increased by 65 per cent since 2009-10, from $29.1 million to $47.6 million in 2011-12.

In 2010 Australia moved the Burma Aid Program from primarily a humanitarian focus to a longer term development plan. The Australian government ' s investment in the aid program in Burma is achieving results that are improving the lives of ordinary Burmese. For example, in partnership with other donors we have reduced the cost of education for poor families by providing education material such as books, stationery and backpacks to 918,000 children in 2,440 primary schools. We have helped 2,700 marginalised ethnic families each access one acre of land through the establishment of community forestry plots in remote areas of northern Rakhine state. Families have increased their income through harvesting their land. Our support to the multi-donor Three Diseases Fund has seen malaria treatment provided to more than 1.48 million people and antiretroviral therapy to nearly 16,000 people living with HIV.

On the Thai-Burma border Australian support to refugees living in camps has led to the number of women in key leadership roles increasing from 11 per cent in 2006 to 32 per cent in 2010. Programs we fund that directly deal with refugees include $1.6 million to provide basic relief for over 140,000 Burmese living in refugee camps on the Thai-Burma border, $1.5 million to provide free primary healthcare to refugees, migrant workers and other vulnerable people who cross the border from Burma to Thailand, and $1.5 million to support vocational training programs for refugees in three camps on the Thai-Burma border to broaden opportunities for future employment. Burma is one of the few countries where the current generation of schoolchildren is likely to be less educated than their parents and grandparents. Australia ' s support for the education sector has helped increase the proportion of primary school students who have stayed up to grade five in target schools. This has increased from 62 per cent in 2007 to 76 per cent in 2010.

During Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd ' s recent visit to Burma in July he urged the Burmese authorities to make concrete progress on human rights issues, including the release of political prisoners, of which there are over 2,000 still remaining, and other democratic and ethnic political figures and resolving longstanding ethnic conflicts peacefully.Australia and the international community stand ready to assist Burma. Australia has always considered the Burmese people our friends and our two countries are woven together by the people that we share. When Cyclone Nagas struck, Australia responded generously despite our political differences with the Burmese authorities. That was the right decision then and it is the right decision now to work together with the international community to do more for the long-term future of Burmese people.

The government will continue to monitor the human rights situation in Burma and to work with other international partners, the UN and other stakeholders on issues of justice and accountability. I commend my local community for the work they do in keeping the plight of Burmese people in the front of our minds and for advocating for a strong humanitarian response. They are a fine community and a welcome addition to our diverse nation.

Proceedings suspended from 13:30 to 16:04

Michael Keenan (Stirling, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Justice, Customs and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Legislative Instruments Amendment (Sunsetting) Bill 2011, although I do so relatively briefly because it is one of the administrative bills that we often deal with in this House that has the support of both sides of the parliament. I do not think it requires me to give an enormously long speech. The coalition support this bill in principle, although we note that it is still before the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs. It is right that the parliament wait to see the results of its report before we finally pass this bill through both houses of parliament. The intention of the proposed amendment seems rational in that legislative instruments will sunset 10 years from the time of their legal commencement. The effect of the current wording of section 50 of the principal act is that instruments with a retrospective commencement date can sunset before that time or can, in some cases, sunset before they are made because they need to operate longer than 10 years into the past. Routine review of legislation will act as a way to ensure that it remains current, clear and relevant. It is important that the status of legislative instruments is easily ascertainable. However, the number of retrospective instruments is not stated in the proposed amendment and there may be a number of instruments which will have their lives significantly extended by this amendment.

As I said at the beginning, I only wish to speak very briefly on this bill. We are interested in what the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs finds when it inquires into this bill and we reserve our right to make any amendments in the Senate if it were to find something that we believe requires action but, considering that the inquiry is still ongoing, I do commend this bill to the House.

Michelle Rowland (Greenway, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I agree that the Legislative Instruments Amendment (Sunsetting) Bill 2011 is a non-controversial piece of legislation. I can, at least, update members on the progress of the bill through the relevant committee, the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, of which I am a member. Such is the non-controversial nature of this bill that, when it was referred to the committee for examination, no submissions were received on the bill and the committee determined it unnecessary to hold public hearings. The recommendation of the committee was that this bill be passed without amendment and the resolutions of the committee in that regard were unanimous.

Whilst this bill is non-controversial, it deals with a fundamental piece of statutory interpretation and rule-making law, the Legislative Instruments Act 2003. When one considers the nature and frequency by which legislative instruments are utilised in our modern system of parliamentary law making, the need to maintain a robust, unambiguous governing statute becomes clear. Indeed, the very definition of what constitutes a legislative instrument, as defined in section 5 of the act itself, is fundamental. Subject to the operation of a number of other subsections a legislative instrument is defined as an instrument in writing:

(a) that is of a legislative character; and

(b) that is or was made in the exercise of a power delegated by the Parliament.

And an instrument is taken to be of a legislative character if:

(a) it determines the law or alters the content of the law, rather than applying the law in a particular case; and

(b) it has the direct or indirect effect of affecting a privilege or interest, imposing an obligation, creating a right, or varying or removing an obligation or right.

The operation of this definition in practice, however, is not necessarily straightforward. Case law has explored the test of whether something is judicial or administrative in nature. One of the key consequences of this distinction is that the answer determines the relevant appealable avenues, primarily through either administrative appeal or the disallowance process.

In the context of the Legislative Instruments Act, 'sunsetting' is usefully defined in the Legislative Instruments Handbook as 'the automatic repeal of a legislative instrument and its amendments after a certain period of operation'.

I would like to turn to the object of the Legislative Instruments Act, as set out in section 3, namely:

… to provide a comprehensive regime for the management of Commonwealth legislative instruments by:

(a) establishing the Federal Register of Legislative Instruments as a repository of Commonwealth legislative instruments, explanatory statements and compilations; and

(b) encouraging rule-makers to undertake appropriate consultation before making legislative instruments; and

(c) encouraging high standards in the drafting of legislative instruments to promote their legal effectiveness, their clarity and their intelligibility to anticipated users; and

(d) improving public access to legislative instruments; and

(e) establishing improved mechanisms for Parliamentary scrutiny of legislative instruments; and

(f) establishing mechanisms to ensure that legislative instruments are periodically reviewed and, if they no longer have a continuing purpose, repealed.

As stated in the explanatory memorandum to the bill, the policy intent of the primary act is that legislative instruments remain in force for 10 years after they are made, but they are subject to review before the end of this period. Hence subsection (f) of the section 3 objects, which I referred to earlier, is arguably the most relevant in this regard in terms of periodical review and repeal where appropriate.

I would like turn briefly to the existing sunsetting provisions in the legislation. The operation of the existing sunsetting provisions are usefully described also in the Legislative Instruments Handbook. Relevantly, the handbook notes the way in which an automatic cessation regime is set out in part 6 of the Legislative Instruments Act. Again consistent with the objects, the handbook notes that the aim of sunsetting is to ensure that legislative instruments are reviewed regularly and retained only if needed and kept up to date.

I would like to briefly mention some of the main provisions of this bill. As I have noted, the Legislative Instruments Act establishes a comprehensive regime for the registration, tabling, scrutiny and sunsetting of legislative instruments.

Proceedings suspended from 16:11 to 16 : 12

The sunsetting regime ensures that legislative instruments are reviewed regularly and kept up to date. The bill makes minor yet important changes to the sunsetting rules as they apply to instruments which commence with retrospective effect. This change will ensure that these instruments have 10 years of operation from the date they are registered on the federal register of legislative instruments before they sunset. Under the current provisions, these instruments can often sunset much earlier than anticipated by the Legislative Instruments Act. The practical effect of this change will be that the calculation of the sunsetting date for legislative instruments which commence retrospectively will begin from their date of registration on the federal register rather than on the day of commencement. Similarly, where some but not all provisions of a legislative instrument commence retrospectively, the sunsetting date for those retrospectively commencing provisions will be calculated from the day of registration rather than commencement.

The changes proposed by the bill do not affect the act's rules about the limited circumstances in which instruments with retrospective operations may be made. As can be seen, these amendments to the Legislative Instruments Act work to make the act much easier to use and increase consistency throughout its operation. So this bill does some very important things through its minor amendments to the Legislative Instruments Act to provide that instruments with retrospective commencement remain in force for 10 years following their registration. I thank the Attorney-General for his work in this area and encourage all members to support this bill. It will give certainty and consistency to the very important advisory role when establishing legislative instruments and their currency.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In summing up, I would like to thank the members for their contributions to the debate. The Legislative Instruments Act (Sunsetting) Bill 2011 is an important bill. It provides for the accountability mechanisms that apply in the making of legislative instruments as well as ensuring that all subordinate legislation is able to be accessed through an online register, the Federal Register of Legislative Instruments. The bill also provides for the eventual sunsetting—that is, automatic ceasing of the legislative instruments. Sunsetting ensures that there is a review of the continuing need for legislative instruments after 10 years of operation. This bill makes a minor and important change to the rules as they apply to instruments which commenced with retrospective effect. The effect of this change will be to allow such instruments to operate for a full 10 years before they sunset. This is consistent with the intended operation of the sunsetting provisions of the bill.

I note that the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs has prepared an advisory report on this bill. The report did not identify any issues in relation to the bill and recommends unanimously that it be passed by the House without amendment. I thank the committee for its consideration of the bill and I commend the bill to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Ordered that the bill be reported to the House without amendment.

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Deputy Chairman , Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to contribute to statements on this matter moved by the Prime Minister last week on Vietnam Veterans Day. In doing so, I mention the wonderful service held in the electorate of Casey on Sunday prior to Vietnam Veterans Day, Sunday, 14 August. It was a service organised and hosted by the Yarra Valley Vietnam Veterans Day Combined Service Committee. It is an initiative of the Vietnam veterans community, the Outer Eastern Sub-Branch of the Vietnam Veterans Association, many of the local RSLs within the Yarra Valley in outer eastern Melbourne, including Healesville, Lilydale, Upper Yarra, Warburton and Yarra Glen, and the National Serviceman's Association. I know the Croydon RSL were also represented at the service, which was held in the Lilydale main street on Sunday morning.

I pay tribute to the members of those RSLs who were there. I want to pay tribute to those Vietnam veterans from each of those RSLs and from surrounding areas who came to that service. The service was larger than in previous years. I make mention of that because I think it is the hope of all of us in this House that the importance of this day continues to grow. Vietnam Veterans Day is a time to reflect on so many matters associated with that long conflict.

I have spoken on a number of occasions before in the House about some of those issues. I particularly reflect, as many members would, on the issues surrounding the Battle of Long Tan and the failure to award medals and appropriate citations after that battle. I do so having known one of the great heroes of the Battle of Long Tan, Cliff Dohle, now deceased, who was a helicopter pilot in that battle. I know the parliamentary secretary at the table is very familiar with the details of the battle and with the story of Cliff Dohle, who passed away a short while back. He performed a pivotal role on the day. Cliff and his wife retired to the Yarra Valley. Getting to know Cliff by meeting him in my electorate office and hearing those stories firsthand is something I have spoken about before. It is only natural that on each Vietnam Veterans Day I think of Cliff and reflect on the Battle of Long Tan.

It is also a time to candidly reflect on how we as a nation treated returning Vietnam servicemen. Former Prime Minister John Howard told the parliament back in 2006 that the entire Australian community failed the servicemen when they returned from Vietnam. All of us know that that is right; that some of those servicemen returning from Vietnam were treated disgracefully and appallingly.

As we celebrate Vietnam Veterans Day, it is a time to remember their contribution and those who lost their lives, and to think of those men who are now taking leadership roles in our RSLs. It is a time to reflect on the past, but equally a time to look to the future. I know that both sides of the House will agree that they are performing leadership roles at so many levels within local RSLs as, with the effluxion of time, we wave goodbye to so many of the World War II and Korean War generation.

Some progress has been made on the issue of the Long Tan medals; I would really like to acknowledge that to the House. It was a difficult issue to try to address many years after that conflict. On Vietnam Veterans Day, we remember all those who served in the Vietnam War and the more than 500 who lost their lives in that conflict. We say thanks as a nation for their contribution. We say 'well done' for the contribution that many continue to make in leadership roles within local RSL clubs.

Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Defence Science and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a great honour to speak in this debate. I thank the member for Casey for his fine remarks and his recognition and acknowledgement of the importance of Long Tan Day, and more generally the importance of recognising the contribution of our Vietnam veterans to the Australian nation.

It is hard for us to understand that over a decade 60,000 Australian men served in Vietnam and of those, sadly, 521 were killed in action or died as a result of their wounds, and over 3,000 were wounded. It is very difficult for those of us who sit in a place like this and who have never worn an Australian uniform—whether it is Air Force, Army or Navy—to understand or appreciate what that actually means. Yes, the war in Vietnam was an unpopular war and, yes, almost half of the Australian men serving there were national servicemen, many of whom did not elect to go. But they went and they went to carry out government policy. This was a choice of government and government, as we know, is the voice of the people. Although we might not understand or even be able to imagine the horror of this conflict, our forebears in this place bear the responsibility for having sent these men to war, so we wear that responsibility. We have to understand and appreciate what actually happened and the depth of sorrow and anguish that results from decisions to send people to war and to see and to know what the long-term implications are of an effort such as this where we lose 521 brave men.

Last Thursday I attended the national Vietnam veterans commemorative service held here at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial on Anzac Parade at which the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition were both present. The Prime Minister gave what I thought was a very fine speech. It was a cold wintery morning, very unlike anything that would have been experienced in Vietnam, but many came to pay their respects to the fallen and remember and pay tribute to the service of so many of our fellow Australians.

As we know, it was 45 years ago to the day that soldiers of Delta Company 6RAR held fast against a large enemy force in the battle of Long Tan. This battle on 18 August was one of the most significant engagements by the Australian forces during the war. There were others. But the importance of this bloody engagement cannot be underestimated—108 Australian and New Zealand soldiers fought a pitched battle against an estimated 2,000 determined North Vietnamese and Vietcong enemy at a rubber plantation near Long Tan. On this terrible day 18 Australians were killed, the most killed in any one engagement of the war in Vietnam.

To recognise their extraordinary gallantry in action, veterans of Delta Company were presented with the unit citation of gallantry by the Governor-General, Her Excellency Mrs Quentin Bryce. The special parade was at Gallipoli Barracks Enoggera in Brisbane on Thursday afternoon. I was honoured and privileged to be in attendance. The veterans there were hosted by the current 6RAR who themselves have only just recently returned from Afghanistan as Mentoring Task Force 1, MTF1. MTF1 was also presented with meritorious unit citation for outstanding service in warlike operations on Operation Slipper in Oruzgan Province in Afghanistan between 20 January and 30 October 2010. It was indeed a proud and very special moment for all involved to see the younger veterans and our Vietnam veterans together on parade and receiving recognition together for their service.

Australian service in Vietnam spanned over 10 years and we pay tribute to the service and sacrifice of Australian service personnel during that entire period. These battles in Vietnam were difficult battles. They were close pitched and intense, fought in difficult conditions. Our service personnel fought in the Anzac spirit, with great courage, conviction and valour.

It is worthwhile pointing out that a number of years ago we still had four MIAs in Vietnam. We have discovered where those MIAs have been. We have recovered their remains and we have brought them home. So their final resting place is in the holy soil of Australia, their home. Sadly though, as we well know, in times past as a nation we have not recognised the service of our veterans from this war as we should have. Vietnam Veterans Day provides the nation with an opportunity to pause and reflect, to remember the service of our Vietnam veterans and pay tribute to those gone before, and to learn from our past so that we may better look after our ADF personnel of today and the future. This is not the time to talk about what we need to do for our current serving personnel but we need to do more.

I am a child of this generation when the war was deeply unpopular here at home. I knew people who were conscientious objectors. I knew people who were national servicemen who went to war. I knew people who were injured by that war, either mentally or physically. Sadly, as they get older, sometimes their difficulties increase. We have yet to come to terms and really understand the depth of hurt which many of these men carry with them today and appreciate what that means for us. As the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, and I am sure as with previous ministers for veterans' affairs, I speak on behalf of the nation when I say to these veterans that, despite your experiences of the past, we are absolutely committed to providing the best we possibly can for your welfare and for your health and that of your families as you get older.

We know that in this country we are living longer and for the many people with challenges that remain, with demons which they cannot expunge, we will work with them to help them get on top of them—and we will. We will continue to do what others have done before. But the message here is very clear to us: as I said at the outset, we in this place bear a special responsibility. It is governments that send people to war. We wear a special responsibility towards our past veterans and today's veterans. We cannot do as was done in the past and ignore their pleas and ignore their needs. We need to accommodate them and work with them to satisfy them. I am committed to doing that.

This day last week was a special day for Australian veterans who served in that war, and for their families. For so many, the families are the ones who bore the burden of the hurt and many still do. We have a special obligation to defence force men and women and their families. Whatever their service, we need to continue to diligently apply ourselves to making sure that they get the very best we can offer.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

With parliament sitting last week, regrettably many of us were unable to attend services in our own electorates. Nonetheless, it should be recorded in this place that, particularly in an electorate like Dickson, we have a vibrant veterans community and they are people who stand very proud for their service, for the loss and sacrifice that they and many of their friends have endured over the course of their service. We salute their service, not just here but right around the country at those ceremonies last week.

The 18th of August this year marked the 45th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan. With all such anniversaries there has to be a lot of reflection but even more so on this 45th anniversary of the gallantry of those who fought in the historic Battle of Long Tan in the Vietnam War. It was a battle which was recognised by the presentation of the Australian Unit Citation for Gallantry by the Governor-General, Quentin Bryce, to the survivors of D Company 6 RAR at Gallipoli Barracks at Enoggera, Brisbane, home of the 6th Battalion of the RAR. I understand that was a very moving ceremony. All of us have over the years heard different stories from veterans in our community about their recollections passed down to them, about the Battle of Long Tan. The youngest Australian to die in that battle was just 19 and the oldest was only 22 and, as I understand, from listening to somebody recently, over half of those killed were Queensland national servicemen. They are men whose bravery will never be forgotten.

On Anzac Avenue in my electorate, at the aptly named Nui Dat bus stop, there is Vietnam Veterans Place, a quiet oasis of reflection on a busy thoroughfare. This memorial was conceived and created by Vietnam veterans in conjunction with the Pine Rivers Shire Council, local businesses and local tradesmen. It includes a flag station, gardens and a brick walkway that includes bricks stamped with the titles of every Australian unit to serve in Vietnam and is a suitable place to contemplate and remember the sacrifices of those who served in Vietnam who are no longer with us.

There are 17 branches of the Vietnam Veterans Association of Australia in Queensland, and one of those, the Brisbane North division, has its headquarters at Black Duck Cottage, at Kallangur in my electorate. With the number of very active RSL sub-branches in Dickson—namely Bray Park-Strathpine,Samford,Dayboro and Pine Rivers district—it is not surprising to note that the Vietnam Veterans Association, which draws from all arms of Defence, has a membership growing from strength to strength, year to year, and has a current membership of 168, all there to uphold their motto, 'Honour the dead but fight like hell for the living'. This Brisbane North branch of the VVAA was formed in around 1982, one of the earliest sub-branches after the Vietnam Veterans Action Group was formed in NSW in 1978. The Brisbane North executive: Peter Thorn, president; Len Halford, senior vice-president; John Barrett, junior vice-president; and Peter Farrelly, treasurer and secretary are to be commended for their work in looking after the welfare of veterans and their families, with the assistance of committee members Gus Fraser, Jim Shaw, Gordon Johnson, Raymond Royston and Fred Ellingworth, among many others. Needless to say, there is also of course a social committee made up of those mentioned above. The dedication of those who are part of the association is enduring, as can be seen in the case of John Smith OAM, who joined the Brisbane North branch in August 1992 and has served as the sub-branch president and vice-president, state president and vice-president and who is now the national vice-president and state delegate to national council.

These are all people of considerable talent and they have all in their own ways made considerable sacrifices. Not only have they made a sacrifice; their families have of course made significant sacrifices as well. At the memorial service at Black Duck Cottage last Thursday morning, Mr Farrelly was the guest speaker. I was given a copy of his speech. I found it quite moving and I want to contribute a little of his speech as part of this debate today. I want to quote him to allow the House to gain an understanding of the quality of the speech that he presented and also the message that he wanted to deliver. The speech reads as follows:

Australian military troops served in the Vietnam War from 1962 through to 1975. It was the longest conflict that Australian servicemen and women fought and served in during our military's short history. It is without doubt also one of the most controversial of wars that any country served, and divided a nation that led to riots and divisions that remain today. It has left a lasting legacy that will take several generations to finally put this part of Australia's history to rest, and during this time it continues to provoke arguments that rekindle and revise the merits of this conflict.

During this period 521 Australian servicemen were killed in Vietnam. In excess of 3,000 servicemen were wounded, whilst some 60,000 military personnel served. Many of these doing two and sometimes three tours of duty. To be able to put troops into the country and to keep our numbers up to the required quota, National Service was made compulsory for young Australians. Any male aged between 17 to 21 and born during a certain month were balloted. National Service evoked controversy from all sides of politics and civilian life and ultimately led to some of the most violent clashes between rioters and police this country has ever seen.

Australia has since recovered all of its war KIA's in operations that defy the massive procedures undertaken to achieve this remarkable feat. Using old memories, maps, co-ordinates given during battle and the ever changing landscape a few dedicated Australian people have painstakingly traced and tracked our war dead and ceremonially returned their remains to their Australian families.

These people continue their work in Vietnam but now assist in the search for the remains of South Vietnamese and North Vietnamese servicemen who died and were buried in the field. At the war's height more than 500,000 American servicemen were in country, where their losses exceeded 60,000.

Peter's speech goes on:

As Australian troops began the main withdrawal in September 1971, those who had returned home earlier found themselves ostracised by friends, the RSL, and even the military which had sent them there in the first place. There was no support from the military; the RSL did not want to know us, and in some instances families did not welcome them home. Increasingly ex-serving soldiers became loners, and sought refuge with other like-minded veterans where they could relate to each other without fear or condemnation. From this the Vietnam Veterans Association of Australia was formed which united the veterans and unified them into a cohesive and powerful veteran voice. They remain the choice of many service organisations today.

The speech went on for a little bit beyond that in most eloquent words and closed in this way:

Today is Vietnam Veterans Day and the 45th anniversary of the battle of Long Tan. A day when Australians remember all those servicemen and servicewomen who served, suffered and died. A day to reflect and commemorate not only fellow Australians but our American and New Zealand comrades in arms and a time to reflect on the misery of the South Vietnamese people that this war ultimately inflicted. To those servicemen and servicewomen who perished in South Vietnam and to those veterans who have since passed, rest in peace my friends. We do remember you all. Lest we forget.

They are powerful words; they are words that speak very strongly for a generation of families who were disproportionately affected by what was a terrible war. It is not a pretty picture of our history, and the way in which people were ultimately treated for their presence in Vietnam, both at the time of their engagement and on return from their engagement, shone an even poorer light on the behaviour of some in this country.

As I said in my opening remarks, we have a very strong local veterans community. Over the course of the last 10 years I have made it my business to befriend and support wherever I can many of the veterans in our local community. I know that in the area of Kallangur, which is on the border of the electorate of Longman, Wyatt Roy has embarked on a similar process. We want to continue to help and assist those veterans and those families who still suffer many of those wounds, particularly mentally, today. We want to make sure that we continue to provide support wherever possible to those families and to the generations that follow, 'where the pain is still felt most surely,' as Peter mentioned in his speech. I close with the mission statement of the Vietnam Veterans Association, which is: 'To assist all veterans, dependants and their descendants in all matters relating to their health, welfare and wellbeing'. We can all be proud of their ongoing service. To the veterans in the Dickson community, I say thank you.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to speak on the Prime Minister's statement on Vietnam Veterans Day. Last Thursday, 18 August, our nation recognised and honoured the veterans of the Vietnam War. Really, Vietnam Veterans Day is a day for all Australians to pay tribute to those who served in the Vietnam War. The day is commemorated each year on the anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan, one of the most significant Australian actions of the Vietnam War. This year marked the 45th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan. This battle occurred on 18 August 1966 and during this battle 18 Australians were killed—the most killed in any one engagement of the Vietnam War—and 24 were wounded. In the years since it was fought, many people have said the battle has achieved a symbolic significance for the Australian military in the Vietnam War which is similar to that of other battles Australians remember, such as the Gallipoli campaign, the Kokoda Track and the Battle of Kapyong. Indeed, Australia's involvement in the Vietnam War remains the longest in duration of any war in Australia's history. It lasted from August 1962 until May 1975. Although the Australian commitment was predominantly Army personnel, there were also significant numbers of civilians as well as Air Force and Navy personnel. According to the Nominal Roll of Vietnam Veterans, almost 60,000 Australians served in Vietnam and 521 Australians died as a result of the war, with over 3,000 wounded. Of the 521 Australian who died in the war, 496 were Australian Army personnel, 17 were RAAF personnel and eight were RAN personnel. The involvement of Australian forces in Vietnam was a gradual escalation, taking place over many years, and our forces battled against extremes of terrain and climate, through dense jungle and monsoonal conditions. They faced a very well-organised force.

We must never forget the service and sacrifice of those very brave Australians; they fought with such great courage and valour in the face of adversity. As many speakers have commented on today, when those Australian troops came home from Vietnam they returned to a nation that was really divided in its view of the war and, mostly, they were not welcomed home by a grateful nation in the same way as troops returning home from World War I or World War II were welcomed before them. For many of the surviving Vietnam veterans, time has not always healed the physical and psychological scars that resulted from their service, and often their families share this physical and emotional burden. It is important to acknowledge that the aftermath of war has been difficult to deal with, and we should recognise the contribution that veterans' families also have made. That is just as vitally important. In acknowledging the very difficult time that many of our veterans had when they came home, it is important to realise, too, that the veterans of the Vietnam War did not receive an official welcome home parade until 1987. That was a significant period of time later and was an issue, understandably, for many of those veterans. It is for this reason, and of course for so many other reasons, that on 18 August each year Australia as a nation recognises, remembers and honours the veterans of the Vietnam War.

My electorate of Richmond has one of the largest numbers of veterans throughout the nation. It has been my honour to meet and work with many of them over the years and to see their great commitment in so many ways. I note that many of them are veterans of the Vietnam War. As other speakers have mentioned, with parliament sitting last week, many of us were not able to attend local events. One of my staff members, Jodie Bellchambers, attended the event of a Vietnam veterans group in my electorate and she laid a wreath on behalf of the Commonwealth. Peter Crockett, a veteran, a lovely man whom we all refer to as 'Davy' Crockett, has organised this event for many years. It is held at South Tweed Sports club, which has supported the veterans group. The club has a lovely memorial garden, and the service is held there every year. I certainly would like to commend Davy for organising this very important event. I know there are many events locally and throughout the nation. It is important that we continue to have those events so that we can take the time to remember the service and sacrifice of all Vietnam veterans.

I would also like to note that the Governor-General marked the day last week on behalf of the nation with the presentation of a unit citation to Delta Company, 6th Battalion of the Royal Australian Regiment, at Gallipoli Barracks at Enoggera in Queensland. The unit citation recognises acts of extraordinary gallantry in action by Delta Company during the Battle of Long Tan.

In concluding today, I would like to quote from Paul Keating's speech at the funeral service of the Unknown Australian Soldier on 11 November, 1993. The Unknown Australian Soldier was a casualty of the First World War, but I believe the sentiments translate to all our veterans from all wars, who have made such sacrifices in the defence of our nation.

For out of the war came a lesson which transcended the horror and tragedy and the inexcusable folly. It was a lesson about ordinary people – and the lesson was that they were not ordinary. On all sides they were the heroes of that war; not the generals and the politicians but the soldiers and sailors and nurses – those who taught us to endure hardship, to show courage, to be bold as well as resilient, to believe in ourselves, to stick together.

The Unknown Australian Soldier whom we are interring today was one of those who, by his deeds, proved that real nobility and grandeur belongs, not to empires and nations, but to the people on whom they, in the last resort, always depend.

Lest we forget.

Ken Wyatt (Hasluck, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a privilege to rise and contribute to the debate. I want to endorse the comments made by my colleagues who have spoken before me. I want to acknowledge Vietnam Veterans Day. The Vietnam War has relevance in terms of my own life experiences as I am of that vintage. As young men and women, we grew up at a time when Australia was committing to the Vietnam War and to the conflict there. We know of some of the events that occurred over a period of time but the footage we saw on television for the first time covered the conflict from its beginning to its end. From those images, we had a sense of some of the challenges that Australian service men and women were experiencing.

Over 60,000 Australians served in the Vietnam conflict. Sadly, 521 paid the ultimate sacrifice for their country and its interests. Some 47,000 Vietnam veterans are alive today and it is for them, their fallen comrades and the families affected that we remember them specifically every year. There are many Vietnam veterans in Hasluck. I often believe that, as members of parliament, we have an incredible privilege in meeting, working and talking with the service men and women who served in many fronts and in many campaigns on behalf of this country. Service men and women when called do not ask; they serve. I have had the privilege and honour to meet with some of these men in my first year in office. The pride with which they acknowledge their service, the regret they express at the loss of life and the frustration of their treatment on returning home from Vietnam makes me truly humble. The pictorial representations that were so strong in those days have etched in my memory the way we treated some of our servicemen returning home from that conflict.

Vietnam Veterans Day is an important occasion but one made even more poignant this year on the 45th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan. In 1966, 18 young Australians died and 24 were wounded in what would become the stuff of legend. I remember the headlines in the local papers that were common in Perth at that time. I particularly remember a cartoon—and I am sure it was drawn by Paul Rigby—that showed Aussie diggers surrounded, at the end of a campaign just leaning there quietly reflecting on the fact that some comrades had fallen but also looking at the insurmountable numbers that had charged during that campaign.

Keen to inflict a politically unacceptable number of casualties on the Australian forces, the North Vietnamese Army and the Vietcong planned an ambush of the Australian troops in the rubber plantation area of Long Tan. I will not repeat the details of this well-known battle here today, but the men of D Company, 6th Royal Australian Regiment, the first APC squadron and a section of the New Zealand artillery defeated a numerically superior force, numbering in the thousands. In the pursuing battle, over 24 hours, the Australian courage and fighting spirit was shown to the world.

Most of these men were not regular soldiers. Many of us of a certain age will remember the controversy surrounding conscription and the drafting of Australia's young men into the armed forces. At Long Tan, conscripts faced off against some of North Vietnam's toughest soldiers and they held themselves and their country in high regard. As a result, a long overdue Unit Citation for Gallantry was awarded last week to D Company of the 6RAR. I honour their courage and am pleased that this nation finally recognises the true sacrifice our armed forces made in this decade-long conflict, which shaped the sixties and the seventies. I have friends who served in the Vietnam War and each one has a different story to tell of their service. Some received devastating physical wounds, but all of them were wounded emotionally and mentally in some capacity. It has taken Australian society a long time to understand and acknowledge issues such as post traumatic stress disorder and the impact they have on returning soldiers and their families. I would like to think that we have learnt from these lessons and are prepared for our troops returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan. But more needs to be done.

I held a recent forum with the shadow minister for veterans' affairs, Senator Michael Ronaldson. Veterans from the conflicts of World War II, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Iraq and Afghanistan came together to talk about their issues. The recurring theme was one of helplessness that our Vietnam veterans felt on return, especially for those who were physically incapacitated as a result of their service, and the impact that that has had on the quality of life. It was very interesting listening to the stories that they shared with us of both their pride of having served their country and the frustration they have for what they termed a 'continuing war', whilst retaining recognition for the rights and entitlements that they were seeking for both the physical, emotional and mental impact that that war had. Certainly, their shared stories brought back to me memories of three people in particular: Peter Keilor, who comes from the town of Corrigin; and two brothers, Peter and David Stone, who are twins, who also served in Vietnam. All three, as I remember them, went away as strong young men. They returned, but Peter lost his limbs, having stood on a mine. David and Peter shared some of their stories but never shared the detail, but certainly indicated their pride in having served.

I would like to thank Senator Michael Ronaldson and the shadow minister for defence, Senator David Johnston, for making it such an informative day for all those who attended, especially those veterans who were in attendance. I am sure that we are all proud of these men because they, as service men and women, fought to ensure that the freedoms we have and we will always enjoy are endured long into the future.

I am equally as proud of the Returned and Services Leagues that call Hasluck home. The Gosnells RSL is a very vibrant group of returned servicemen. The Bellevue RSL and the Kalamunda RSL all represent their members well. I enjoy the camaraderie of the discussions that I have with them on issues that they raise. Issues about ex-Vietnamese servicemen now dominate their agenda, and the coalition continues to work hard to shape appropriate policy in this area.

Earlier this year I held a Saluting Their Service ceremony in my electoral office. I was fortunate enough to be able to present several Vietnam War veterans with a certificate acknowledging their efforts in this brutal conflict. What was really warming, and it quite touched me and my staff, was not just sitting there, listening to them as veterans swapped their stories, their experiences about the challenges that they still grapple with but being able to contribute to that discussion. They were all men of different ages, from different conflicts, with different experiences but, from their perspective, they were all Australians who served their country.

Once again, I want to acknowledge the 60,000 service personnel who served in Vietnam and sacrificed so much in the name of this great country. Our armed forces do not choose where they fight, but they fight when called upon and they must always be honoured and respected. It is the foundation upon which this nation was built. I want to acknowledge their contribution and ask that we never forget what they have given us. Thank you, Deputy Speaker.

Mike Kelly (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is an honour to speak on this issue today and it is a day when we recall not just the events of this very significant battle in the Vietnam War but commemorate the entire service of our men and women in the Vietnam War. It is in that spirit that I would like to draw attention to the range of experiences of the people who served in and survived that conflict. Those who came back injured, of course, are often forgotten among the stories of the casualties who did not come back, those who were killed in action. But those who did come back suffered horrendously in relation to the disabilities they acquired. In that conflict so many more survived to live on than in previous conflicts because the battlefield service of our medical services was so good in Vietnam. But they lived with horrendous injuries nevertheless. In fact I was recruited by Brigadier Billy Rolfe, who lost both legs in Vietnam and still went on to make a great deal of his life afterwards. He became a brigadier in the Army, he was a well-known rugby fanatic who coached teams, and he went on and got himself a law degree as well. He was typical of that spirit, the veteran who was not going to be defeated by such horrendous injuries. Quite often in the past those injuries would have led to death in the battlefield, but so many Vietnam veterans did come home to fight that battle.

For those who did not come back to the Army there was a real problem. They went back to a community that, in large degree, either ignored or vilified them. There was either apathy or actual aggression. Both sides of politics let these veterans down. For them it was particularly tough. To endure the things that they had had to endure and to perform their duty in the way they had had to perform it and then not to have support from their community was particularly psychologically devastating. I think we have all learned the lessons of that period. In the case of veterans who now return from conflicts such as Iraq, where there was also controversy, everyone across the spectrum has learned that you do not take out these issues on the veterans. It is the political masters who have to answer for making such decisions.

I think those who came back and stayed in the Army had an easier time because they were respected and admired within the Army for their service and for what they had accomplished. The Army that I joined—in terms of the key ingredients, the key bones and sinews and intellect that drove our organisation during my early service—was shaped and driven and influenced by that core of Vietnam veterans that fleshed out the entire organisation. I benefited enormously from the training that I received from those veterans. The training that they provided me helped me survive through the deployments that I went on to serve in, but the whole organisation benefited. The received wisdom that was passed down through the generations that have served since is still there in our Army and it has enabled us to serve well in similarly complex operational environments—these counterinsurgency environments. When we went to Somalia with the 1st Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment, the very first thing Lieutenant General David Hurley, who is now our Chief of the Defence Force, said was, 'Well, this looks to me like a counterinsurgency type of environment.' And he went on to apply all of those intuitive things that he had learned at the hands of the Vietnam veterans who had trained us. I pay tribute to all of them who put me through the mill at Battle Wing in Land Warfare Centre, Canungra, where of course most of those Vietnam veterans also did their predeployment training to go to Vietnam.

So I think they coped better when they were in the Army, in an organisation that valued their service. But then there were the families of those who came back who did not have that support. The families certainly endured a great deal in living with veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, and we should really acknowledge all that they went through over the many years that they had to cope with those psychological issues and other, physical, issues that their family members came back with. Their support for their people and their sacrifice on behalf of this nation as well, not only for those who lost their lives but for those they had to support, is certainly something that we should acknowledge as well as part of the commemoration of this day. We do need to have a better understanding of the day itself. It took a long time before we really appreciated the full strategic and tactical importance of this battle. Delta Company, only a company-strength unit, took on two manoeuvre units of the enemy—the Vietcong 275th Regiment, which itself was composed largely of regulars from the north and the famous, or infamous, D445 battalion of local force Vietcong. So two large manoeuvre units confronted a subunit, the Delta Company, of the 6th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment. As has been pointed out, they were vastly outnumbered. One thing that strikes you as you read about this battle, or if you see the transcripts or hear the recordings of the radio telephone traffic that took place during the battle, is that you really appreciate the professionalism of these soldiers. Through the incredible stress of what was going on, they maintained their discipline and their professionalism in directing the fire support that they received was first class, and was what actually saved the members of the unit who were able to survive the battle.

In that respect, I pay tribute today particularly to the New Zealanders who supported our troops—the 161 Battery, Royal New Zealand Artillery—and to the service that Captain Morrie Stanley rendered that day. Morrie, unfortunately, passed away on 16 September last year. He was a tremendous professional but also a really fine man. He had tremendous empathy for the soldiers whom he was trying to support. You can see that if you watch the very fine documentary that the Foxtel company produced on this battle. I am so glad that we have that oral history of Morrie, since he left us last year. It was a poignant moment for other veterans of the battle who were able to see him in hospital and hand over to him the decorations that we were able to obtain in recognition of what this battle actually meant.

This battle for appropriate recognition was a long-fought battle, particularly by Harry Smith, on behalf of his soldiers over many years. It was only recently that we understood that the efforts of Delta Company in fact saved the 1st Australian Task Force, which at that time was still establishing itself. This was a concerted effort by the enemy to annihilate the task force. Not only did Delta Company and the supporting elements achieve the success that they did and defeat that objective; also, through the overwhelming casualties that were caused to the enemy, they really devastated them to the extent that they were not able to mount such an effort ever again in Phuoc Tuy province. As a result, we were able to contribute to other efforts elsewhere.

This battle for appropriate recognition is something that is a bit of a shame on this country. I am so pleased that we were finally able to bring that to conclusion. Certainly, we know that the quota system, the system that applied at the time, really denied some of the key players of that battle the recognition that they deserved, such as Harry Smith whose award recommendation was downgraded. So we were able to give him the Star of Gallantry and, similarly, second lieutenants Geoff Kendall and Dave Sabben had their decorations upgraded to the Medal of Gallantry. Subsequent to that, we established the Honours and Awards Tribunal, which looked after a few other unfinished business elements of the battle, such as in relation to Cliff Dohle, one of the Iroquois pilots awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for his efforts, and of course the overall awarding of the Unit Citation for Gallantry to Delta Company. They were of course, back in 1968, acknowledged by President Johnson with the Presidential Unit Citation, which I know the unit wears with pride.

An element of controversy was the South Vietnamese intention towards Delta Company. I was able to get together with Paul Ham, the Vietnam War historian, to get to the bottom of this issue. We were able to uncover diplomatic traffic that clearly indicated that it had been the intention of the South Vietnamese government to award the Cross of Gallantry with Palm Unit Citation to that unit. At the time the Australian government rejected that offer and instead members of the unit were given dolls by the Vietnamese, which as you will appreciate did not quite reflect the significance of their efforts. So we were able to clarify that and the members of the unit were awarded that Cross of Gallantry with Palm Unit Citation as well. We have managed to clear up a lot of unfinished business from the years when this was a running sore for people like Harry Smith. I know Harry was not able to get to the award ceremony on 18 August that the Governor-General attended, but Harry has been acknowledged by all his soldiers for the massive effort that he has put in over the years on their behalf. Harry, we really salute you.

It has been a real privilege for me to have known and had many conversations with Harry, as it has been for me to have known so many of the veterans of this battle—guys like Bob Buick, who I spoke to on the phone only a few days ago. I met many of them at the famous Sporties Bar at 6RAR when I was playing rugby for 6RAR. We won the premiership and these veterans would always turn up to Sporties and share their stories with us—a great bunch of blokes; fantastic people.

Probably the most poignant and satisfying moment of my time in politics has been the mission to Vietnam that we went on to bring back the remains of Michael Herbert and Robert Carver, the last two of our service people missing in action in Vietnam, members of No. 2 Squadron, Magpie squadron, flying Canberra bombers. I went over there with a good friend, Alan Curr, who served with both of them, and with me in Timor. It was an incredibly emotional experience travelling over there with the families and veterans of the unit to bring our last two back. In effect, it is mission accomplished, in that we did not leave anybody behind.

At the same time, dealing with the Vietnamese authorities really brought a lot of issues home to us. They were so welcoming, generous and warm hearted in how they received us and the families. It was a tremendous experience, but the poignancy of it was emphasised by the fact that they still have 300,000 of their own missing in action from that war. It is a great source of pride to me that today Australians are assisting the Vietnamese to locate those who are missing in action in battlefields that we served on, and that we have the records and the technical capability to assist them. This is one of the things that is forming a wonderful bond between our two countries now. Something beautiful has actually grown from this horrendous experience. Thousands of Australian students travel to Vietnam, and many Australian tourists as well, and many Vietnamese come to learn and study in Australia. So a wonderful bond and thread has grown up—and also amongst the veterans of both sides in the dealings they have with each other.

Obviously, how we address the situation with the mental health issues that they face is something we have been trying to move on with. I am very pleased that we have had the Applied Suicide Intervention Skills Training program, which we have put $1 million towards, and that we have introduced the comprehensive mental health 'lifecycle' package. This fell out of the improve mental health studies that we instituted, and $92 million has been allocated for the implementation of both those studies. These are some of the things that need to be done to respond to the issues that emerge from these conflicts, and a lot more is still necessary.

I will finish by talking about the importance of maintaining the lessons from that war. All of my career has been basically in a counterinsurgency style environment, and all of those lessons that were taught to us by those Vietnam veterans remain relevant today. I am really pleased that finally we have managed to institutionalise that cultural and historical experience by now creating the Asia Pacific Civil-Military Centre of Excellence, which is based out at Queanbeyan. This takes the lessons that we need to learn from counterinsurgency and emphasises that the types of environments and conflicts we are facing in Afghanistan are not just military. They are social, economic and political issues and they all have to be addressed at the same time and meshed with a cohesive strategy.

Having recently spent a week on the ground in Afghanistan, I am delighted to see the impact of that strategy. That reorientation of our approach is really starting to take effect marvellously on the ground in Oruzgan Province, which is recognised by the other contingents in Afghanistan and by the Regional Commander South, who has emphasised that Oruzgan is the model that others should emulate if they are to achieve success in Afghanistan. So the spirit, the experience and the service of these veterans from Vietnam lives on in what our troops today are doing on the ground in Afghanistan. I salute what they gave to me and what they gave to the country. It is a proud tradition, a proud record and a proud experience which we should continue to honour in every way possible.

Paul Neville (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is an honour to speak in this debate today and to acknowledge the 45th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan. The date of 18 August should burn in all our psyches for lots of reasons. Looking back over Australia's military history, there have been great battles like Gallipoli in the First World War, and in the Second World War we talk about the Battle of Britain, El Alamein, Tobruk, the Kokoda Track and Milne Bay. When you get closer to home there is the Battle of Kapyong in Korea and there is Long Tan.

As the Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Dr Kelly, just said, the Vietnam War left a lot of scars. Today is not the day to apportion blame to individual groups or political parties but, rather, to recognise that there was unacceptable conduct in our nation by some of our own people, who treated the Vietnam veterans abysmally when they returned from that conflict. Some of the veterans have told me that shortly after they got home they were advised by the military to get into civvies and not go out in their uniform—these fellows were not quite discharged, but they were back in Australia—for fear they would be abused and spat on. That really is a dreadful indictment on all of us. I put myself in that category. It was against that backdrop that those who fought in Vietnam, particularly those who fought in some of the seminal battles, like Firebase Coral and Long Tan, were never properly recognised. In fact, in the case of Harry Smith, Dave Sabben and Geoff Kendall—whom the parliamentary secretary just spoke about—their honours, recommended at the Battle of Long Tan, were actually downgraded. What a disgrace; what an utter disgrace.

The 45th anniversary was an opportunity to put that right. We have not been really good at acknowledging some of our heroes, and it is good that we now have a tribunal looking into the cases of people—even of people from the Second World War, like Teddy Sheean. Just imagine that young man going down and firing his machine gun as the waves came up around him! He would not leave his post. It is the stuff of legend. We recently celebrated the death of the White Mouse and her contribution to the war effort. She was the most decorated woman of the Second World War. She was one of ours, but it took us 60 years to acknowledge her effort. The 45th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan was a time to put some of the ghosts to rest, to put some of our bad attitudes away and to recognise the Battle of Long Tan for what it was.

I had the honour of being paired with Minister Warren Snowdon and going to Brisbane to see the parade. And what a moving ceremony that was: the whole 6RQR on parade at Enoggera Barracks; the Chief of Army, Lieutenant General Morrison; the Governor-General; and, most particularly, of those who served at Long Tan there were over 80 soldiers, and widows. When you allow for the 108 who were there and the headquarters people, there were probably 120 in all—Harry Smith says probably about 120—and 80 of them could be there on that day to see the unit honoured. What a phenomenal day it was. The drill was impeccable, the music was perfect and the overlay was these 80 veterans. They have this ceremony where the troops march in open order through the ranks of the serving troops, and seeing them marching through the ranks brought the crowd to its feet with applause.

The other thing that struck us was that the Governor-General placed a wreath on the cross. We have different memorials for different activities in our history. If you go around Australia you will find that most of the memorials to the Battle of Tobruk are in the shape of the memorial that was built in the cemetery at Tobruk. If you go to Vietnam War memorials, you find that quite a lot of them are in the shape of the Long Tan cross, which is a roughly hewn cross with a circular panel, not quite a Celtic cross—I think all the honourable members would know what I am talking about. One of those crosses is at Enoggera Barracks, where the wreath was laid.

I mentioned Harry Smith, who was to be awarded the DSO, which was downgraded to a Military Cross and then upgraded again to the Star of Gallantry, which is the equivalent of the DSO. But the awards for Dave Sabin and Geoff Kendall were downgraded from military crosses to military medals and then upgraded again to the Medal for Gallantry. Dave Sabin had never received his and it was presented to him by the Governor-General, and the Unit Citation for Gallantry, which should have been awarded 44 or 45 years ago, was presented to the other lieutenant, Geoff Kendall. They both served beside Harry Smith in the battle.

Harry attended the Long Tan celebrations in Townsville. As a result of a recent medical treatment, he was not able to fly to Brisbane, and that was a sad thing because if it was anyone's day it was Harry Smith's. As you watched that magnificent parade, you could not help reflecting on what he did on that day. As the parliamentary secretary and others have mentioned, the Battle of Long Tan occurred by chance. A D Company, 6RQR patrol had gone out and, at around midday or early-afternoon, they encountered 2½ thousand Vietcong and North Vietnamese regulars—quite a formidable force. As we subsequently know, their real target was the base at Nui Dat, where there was to be a concert that day with Little Pattie and Johnny O'Keefe. It would have been a light and frothy day, so just imagine 2½ thousand troops descending on that. What a bloodbath that would have been. By chance, while out on patrol, the Australians ended up in battle with this group. They were a well-equipped group, as the Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has just said. They had artillery as well. It was on the edge of the rubber plantation and it was in pouring rain. The battle raged for three hours—105 Australians and three New Zealanders took on 2,500 North Vietnamese regulars and irregulars. Shocking sorts of odds. You read the battle—and we do not have time to go into every aspect of it—but for example at one stage one of the platoons was surrounded and two other platoons went out to relieve them to fight their way into their position and to get them out back to the Australian line.

Then there was Morrie Stanley the New Zealand artillery officer who was lying beside Harry Smith, right at the front, in three inches of muddy water calling down the artillery that was coming from three units—Australian, American and New Zealander. That barrage was exploding in the rubber plantation and was causing devastating injuries to the North Vietnamese attackers. As I said, the battle went on for three hours. At one stage they nearly ran out of ammunition and equally bravely the RAAF flew in with an improvised drop of ammunition wrapped in blankets in the thick of the battle. That too was enormously courageous.

They persisted and they won the battle. They saved most of their unit. Tragically they lost 18 with 24 wounded but one only shudders to think what might have happened if that group had got anywhere near Nui Dat on that day. So they also saved the pride of Australia in that battle and as Parliamentary Secretary Kelly just told us it weakened for all time the role of the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese regulars in that province. So that was what we celebrated—45 years since that event.

I stay very close to my Vietnam veterans because I think they have had a rougher time than most. There were even some RSL clubs that would not accept them as members, thankfully not a lot, but some would not and that was a great sense of unhappiness to them. They did not lose their sense of camaraderie and having served for Australia and in many towns they formed their owned branches, some as South Vietnam Veterans' Association and others as South East Asian Group. In my area both main groups, the one in Bundaberg, has its own headquarters and as the local member I took some pride in helping them with former ministers and being able to get funds to purchase accommodation—it was an old church that they have turned into a very nice club. In Hervey Bay the old historic railway station is also now the headquarters of the Vietnam Veterans' Association Hervey Bay Sub-Branch.

You often wonder just how much healing had really gone on but I think it was two or three years ago I went to the Long Tan Day at Hervey Bay and Harry Smith had some of his unit with him; I think there were eight of them. They went up as a group to lay their wreaths and as they laid their wreaths and stepped back the entire crowd—which was considerable I might add—burst into loud and sustained applause. I have never seen that at a wreath laying. Wreath laying is generally a very sombre thing; a reflective thing. But, on that occasion, the members of the public who were there could not contain themselves because they knew the story of how badly these men had been treated as veterans but also, in particular, how badly D company 6RAR had been treated in the acknowledgement of what was the seminal battle of the Vietnam War. I return to an earlier theme, when I said we are not very good at recognising our heroes. Two of the 11 have received some awards, but there are still nine who have received only MIDs, mentioned in dispatches, which hardly reflects what went on that day. They were all recommended by Harry on that day for truly exceptional courage, and I will not rest until those 11 are upgraded.

I bring that up not to put a political or dark overlay on the celebration of Long Tan Day but rather to say that there is still some unresolved business. We as a nation need to step back and take one last look, as we put this behind us, to make sure that we have honoured truly exceptional courage and, in the case of Harry Smith, Dave Sabben, Geoff Kendall and Morrie Stanley, truly exceptional leadership, and that we do not forget the ones who really stuck their necks out for this country, those last 11. Long Tan Day is a marvellous day, a day that is now well established in the Australian lexicon. I hope that it will lead to complete fulfilment in the coming years, once we have acknowledged the last 11 veterans.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Last Thursday marked the 45th anniversary of the legendary Vietnam battle at Long Tan, where 105 Australians and three New Zealanders fought and withstood an attack of some 2,500 Vietcong and North Vietnamese troops in a rubber plantation. At the end of that battle, 18 Australian soldiers had been killed and 24 wounded, while 800 of the North Vietnamese Army and Vietcong had been killed and more than 1,000 wounded. The Battle of Long Tan, involving B Company and D Company 6RAR, was probably the most famous action of Vietnam fought by the Anzacs. As long as Long Tan is remembered as one of the major battles in Vietnam for our troops, it will also represent a day that veterans come together with members of the community to pay their respects on what is now Vietnam Veterans Day.

The Vietnam War was the longest major conflict in which Australians have been involved. It lasted 10 years, from 1962 to 1972. In the electorate of McEwen, as occurs all over Australia, veterans, families, friends and supporters come together to reflect on and remember all of the 62,100 Australian service personnel and civilians who fought in the name of our country, the 521 Australians who made the ultimate sacrifice and the 2,398 who were wounded.

In the nearly four decades since the end of the Vietnam War, there has been much heartache and much healing. Although people will differ in their opinions on the Vietnam War, I personally want to put on the record my total admiration and respect for and thanks to all those who bravely went to war and how sorry I am for the mistreatment they received on their return. Our troops deserve our unqualified support and respect. These brave men and women are the ones who are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice for our country and the beliefs we hold so dearly. For that courage and bravery, I want to say thank you. I, like many Australians, have visited Vietnam and been through Phuoc Tuy province and walked through the rubber plantations at Long Tan. I have been to the Australian task force base at Nui Dat and been through the tunnels at Cu Chi. I have stood at these sites; I have walked the Luscombe airstrip. I have reflected and paid my respects to the brave Australians. I must say it was a very haunting, emotional and overwhelming experience. I want to thank the tour guide who was with me, an ex-6RAR man, Breaker Cusack. Breaker really brought the whole thing to reality as we walked through the rubber plantations and the silence. With each step he talked about what happened here and what happened there before you finally get to the cross. You pay your respects to soldiers from both sides who fought in that battle. One of the things I noticed in Vietnam was the reconciliation that has happened since that time and the warmth that Australians receive there. It was a very haunting experience to walk through those different battlefields and places of significance for Australian veterans.

My electorate of McEwen has a long and rich history of supporting our armed forces and the township of Seymour, in particular, has a proud military tradition. Since the Boer War the area has housed Army training camps. After Federation this troop camp became part of the 7th Australian Light Horse, camped at site 17, which we now know and recognise as the Australian Light Horse Memorial Park, a place of great significance to Australia and a place I think many Australians should visit to see the fields where the Anzac traditions were born and what they went through.

During World War I a permanent camp was set up and in the 1920s the Seymour shire became the chief military area in the state. Eventually this led to the establishment of Puckapunyal Army Camp in World War II. During World War II my grandfather, George Mitchell, passed through there on his way to places like Tobruk, Alamein and Borneo, where he and many others fought for our freedom. To me, it makes sense that Seymour is proudly honouring all those who served in Vietnam with the construction of the Vietnam veterans commemorative walk. It will be an area for reflection and commemoration for the Vietnam veterans and their families. It will have over 300 metres of stainless steel walls with the name of every Australian personnel who served in Vietnam. The Vietnam Veterans Association of Australia say:

The Commemorative Walk is not to memorialise those who served in Vietnam and/or those who paid the ultimate price, but to commemorate the service of all who played their part in what turned out to be a tumultuous part of Australia's history.

Some of the stories of Vietnam are represented in a replica of Luscombe Bowl, which was once the entertainment venue set up by soldiers during the war, at the end of Luscombe Airfield at Nui Dat. The replica centre in Seymour is now an interpretive centre. The next stage of the walk will have imitation rubber trees, rice paddies and military artefacts. Through this government we have secured a Centurian tank and we are working very hard to obtain a M113APC, some M2A2 Howitzers and our ultimate goal is to get a Huey helicopter. At the opening of stage 1 of the commemorative walk, veterans came from all around our nation to this place of significance, because it was born by them for them. It was something to behold. They were the ones who put the idea together of the commemorative walk and they are the ones who turned up in droves to see it. One of the most interesting things was to see people who had not seen each other for many, many years getting together, having a celebration and enjoying what had been done by Labor governments, both state and federal, getting together and putting the money in to get this fantastic venture done. It will become a tourist attraction for many of the veterans who are entering the grey nomad phase so they can see the importance of what they have done for our country and to see all their names on a wall.

Our Australian commitment consisted predominantly of Army personnel but there was also a significant number of Air Force, Navy and some civilian personnel who were involved throughout the Vietnam conflict. As I said earlier, the later parts of the war were the cause of social and political dissent in Australia—since the conscription referendums of the First World War. It was a part of our history and only time has been able to heal the emotional wounds of so many.

I first recall my interest being sparked in the Vietnam conflict, and the resulting issues that veterans faced, when my good friend, Craig Ingram—the former member for Gippsland in the Victorian parliament—loaned me a copy of a book titled Well Done, Those Men by Barry Heard. I read that book straight through from start to finish and could not put it down. It was a fascinating read because it was about Barry's very personal account. It explains how, as a conscript, he was one of the many young men sent off to Vietnam, completely unprepared for the emotional and psychological impact of what they would do and what they would have done to them there. As a result, he spent the next 30 years having 'a slow motion breakdown'. His story of his long journey home from Vietnam is an inspiring story of a life reclaimed and it gives strength to that generation of Australian men who had been through very similar experiences.

Since that awakening experience, I have continued to work and support the brave men and women who were prepared to pay the ultimate sacrifice in the name of our country. There are many Vietnam veterans in my community and I can say that they are a dogged lot, especially when it comes to getting funds up and running for this Vietnam veterans commemorative walk. I guess that is what makes them so special. Recently, I was very honoured to present some 'Saluting their service' certificates to two of our finest—locals, Tony Gill and Bill Scott, residents of McEwen and people whom I am very proud to have made their acquaintance. In doing these ceremonies, we invited one of the primary schools who had just finished doing a term's work on military history. It was an absolute sensation to have those guys there getting their certificates, being recognised for what they have done, and to have this young generation of kids there with so much interest, passion and support for everything that they had been through in their schoolwork.

As my last note, I would like to say a simple thank you. Time cannot change the past, but what we do know can change the future and make us sure that this episode in Australian history is recognised and given the reverence and attention that it so richly deserves.

Russell Matheson (Macarthur, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is with great honour that I rise today to pay tribute to the men and women of Australia's armed forces who fought for this country in Vietnam between 23 May 1962 and 29 April 1975. The nominal role of the Vietnam veterans includes 61,000 men and women who served in the Royal Australian Navy, Australian Army and the Royal Australian Air Force in Vietnam or in the waters adjacent to Vietnam during this time. On Vietnam Veterans Day last week, I was pleased to see survivors of Delta Company 6RAR honoured with a Unit Citation for Gallantry for their actions in the Battle of Long Tan. It is a shame it has taken 45 years for these fine soldiers to be recognised. Let us hope we have learned from our past when recognising the sacrifice and service of our ADF personnel now and into the future.

Not detracting from the inspiring efforts of Delta Company 6RAR and the Battle of Long Tan, today I would also like to make mention of the 103rd Field Battery, who supported Delta Company in the Battle of Long Tan all those years ago. They were part of four artillery units from 1 Field Regiment at Nui Dat, which also included the 161st Field Battery, Royal New Zealand Army; 105th Field Battery, Royal Australian Army; and A Battery, 2nd/35th Howitzer Battalion, US Army. My father was a member of 103 Field Battery and fought gallantly in the battle. It was one of the biggest and most important conflicts in the Vietnam War involving Australian troops. Whilst my father understands and accepts that 103 Field Battery will not receive a citation due military protocols, I believe every member of this battery, and all other support batteries, would be worthy recipients. I have been approached by family members of these men who also believe these soldiers deserve recognition for their efforts during the Battle of Long Tan, even though they were officially attached to 5RAR. It saddened me on Vietnam Veterans Day last week to have a number of phone calls from people crying and reliving their stories. I believe that these support batteries should be shown the respect and honour they deserve. Surely this is not too much to ask.

The battle was one of the most successful campaigns Australian troops have ever been involved in. Eighteen Australians died, while the enemy death toll was put as high as 800. It was August 18 1966 when 108 Australian and New Zealand soldiers of the 6th Battalion, RAR, D Company faced an enemy force of over 2½ thousand. The 103 Field Battery played a pivotal role in this historic battle. Its members pounded the enemy with 1,000 rounds of artillery, a round every 10 seconds, creating a wall of steel around the embattled men of D Company. Revisiting this battle: non-military personnel at the base formed ad hoc teams of labourers and worked through the night in the pouring rain to keep up the supply of ammunition to the guns. The 103 Field Battery had to be resupplied by Iroquois choppers from 9 Squadron RAAF, making the guns a prime target for enemy fire. These men struggled through torrential rain which made aiming the guns almost impossible, leaving gunners to rely on their own intuition to ensure they fired on the enemy and not on the men of D Company. To make a bad situation worse, poisonous cordite fumes from the artillery fire built up a toxic haze around the guns. Despite hardly being able to breathe or even see through the haze, the brave men of the 103rd and 105th field batteries kept up the artillery fire all through the night and into the morning, delivering victory to the Australians. The men involved in the Battle of Long Tan demonstrated courage, bravery and determination in spite of next to impossible conditions.

It is for these reasons that I believe that the members of 103 Field Battery are also worthy of citation. Even though military protocol prevents this citation from happening, I will always be immensely proud of my father, Reg, for his courageous actions on that horrific day. Unfortunately, the Vietnam War was especially cruel to the minds and bodies of returned servicemen because of the strong political anti-war sentiments that were rife at the time. While the success of the Battle of Long Tan will be remembered by generations of Australians to come, we must also consider the effect the war has had on many soldiers, their families and the community. I remember vividly as a young child my father returning from Vietnam. We used to go into his bedroom, where he slept with his eyes open, to try and wake him up. He would jump up and nearly strangle you, reliving the war in Vietnam. He slept with his eyes open. He relived every moment of Vietnam in his dreams. I remember him sleepwalking through the house. Still to this day, when I visit him on holiday, my father relives those memories in his dreams. These are things that I will never forget and they touch me deeply. As a young child it was very, very disturbing to see what was happening to my father, and it still happens to him today and to the many Vietnam Veterans who returned from war, especially those who were involved in the Battle of Long Tan.

There are currently more than 500 Vietnam Veterans living in the Macarthur region. I am a member of the Macarthur branch of Australian Vietnam Veterans and I have always supported its members in whatever I can do, particularly in relation to their health and their wellbeing. The veterans of this group are a fantastic group of men who have all fought gallantly for this country. Now they meet on a daily basis to offer support to each other. They have established a museum in memory of those who fought in Vietnam. I am proud of all our local veterans, not only for their courage during battle but for their strength during the anti-war sentiments that targeted our troops after their return home. My hope is that Australia will never allow Defence Force personnel returning from duty to be treated as Vietnam Veterans were. I know that a number of speakers today have touched on this. There are few who will endure the haunting realities of war. We should not take these soldiers' personal sacrifice for granted. My hope for all Australian Vietnam veterans, including my father, is that 45 years later they can all hold their heads up high.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is an honour to follow the member for Macarthur on this. I know this is an issue that is very close to his heart as I recall he spoke about his father's commitment in the Vietnam War in his first speech to the House. I also rise today to pay tribute to the veterans of Long Tan and to all the Australians who served in the Vietnam War. As the member for Fowler—and I have to say this—it probably has an even more special significance for me, given that I also represent one of the largest Vietnamese communities outside Vietnam.

The commemorations that took place throughout the country on 18 August certainly did stir the emotions and the spirit of all involved in the conflict, their families and those who recognise the effort that was put in on behalf of the nation. As in all other theatres of conflict in which Australian soldiers have served, these Australians served bravely in Vietnam, they served their nation with courage and they served it with distinction.

Having said that—and following the point just made by the member for Macarthur—the veterans of the Vietnam conflict were treated very poorly on their return to this country. No matter what your views may have been with respect to the Vietnam War, those who served this country in our country's interests did not deserve to be treated the way they were when they returned to this country. I would like to put on record my apologies to all those veterans who were subject to that treatment. It is something that needs to be said as the grieving is still taking place for many of those Vietnam veterans. There is no excuse at all for treating our returned servicemen and, indeed, some women that way. After all, they were the ones who were called to put their lives on the line when their country needed it. Their dedication and their commitment to service must be honoured. They dedicated themselves to the service of this country, no matter how they were recruited to Vietnam—many were national servicemen who were drafted into it. But regardless of how they came to be in the war, they did service in the interest of the Australian nation and they discharged their duty with all due valour and honour.

This is something that does sit very solidly in the Australian psyche. You do not have to attend many Vietnam veteran occasions to see this. It is not only the pride of the returned servicemen you see there. I see it, and no doubt the member for Macarthur and all the other members present know that you actually see it, in the school children who are now turning up as they learn about our commitment. It is quite clear that this is the day we not only the commemorate the battle at Long Tan, but also the day we remember all those who served in the Vietnam War. The Battle of Long Tan stands equally proudly in Australian military history with Gallipoli, the Somme, Tobruk and Kokoda. These are things that young school children now learn, and rightfully so, because they are things that they should be proud to know. It was an engagement against all the odds, where Australians were called upon to engage an enemy in what was probably a very much unforseen battle under very, very difficult circumstances. Long Tan was the first major engagement in Vietnam in which Australian troops were involved. This battle was the stuff that, quite frankly, legends were made of. Once again, Australian soldiers found themselves in a position where only their sheer bravery and their determination allowed them to stand against the odds. You draw lines of similarity with all those other theatres, such as Gallipoli, the Somme, Tobruk and Kokoda. We should recall that Delta Company 6RAR encountered a far superior force numerically as they fought in the rain, mud and mist of the rubber plantation that ran along the outside of the village of Long Tan. No-one could have reasonably expected that a force of 108 Australians, mostly young National Service men, led by a few regulars, with the support of artillery, including some Australian and New Zealand artillery as it turned out, could have held off a force the equivalent of almost two battalions. It comprised over 2,000 North Vietnamese army regulars and local Viet Cong guerrillas. There was wave after wave of enemy attack on the Australian position. During the few hours that this battle lasted, there were many acts of bravery and mateship which have come to typify Australian involvement in war. To put it realistically, it is the Anzac spirit.

For three hours they fought in the rain, with nothing more than a few plantation rubber trees and the mist generated by the rain for cover. They were waiting all that time for reinforcements to arrive. In the Anzac tradition, as I said, these Australians were supported by both Australian and New Zealand artillery. Sadly, lives on both sides were lost that day. By the end of the battle, 18 Australians had lost their lives and another 24 had been wounded. It is interesting that the oldest Australian casualty on that occasion was a 22-year-old and the youngest was a 19-year-old. That puts it in context when you think about your own kids. The other side, I understand, lost in excess of 250, with another 500 wounded.

As I mentioned at the outset, despite the significance of the Long Tan Battle, its commemoration is not simply of the battle itself but of all Vietnam veterans. It is about the nearly 500,000 who served in Vietnam, it is about the soldiers and it is about the families of the 500 Australian troops who lost their lives in service to their country. It is also about the 3,000 who were wounded during the conflict. Everyone who served in the Vietnam conflict deserves proper recognition and the full respect of the Australian people.

We always need to be mindful of the fact that, even though the last of our troops were withdrawn from Vietnam in 1972, it was not until October 1987 that Australia officially held ceremonies to recognise the homecoming of our Vietnam veterans. Vietnam veterans throughout Australia continue to suffer and are haunted by the ghosts of their involvement in the war. It is an important part of Australian history and should be given that status. I hope that no group of Australian veterans is ever treated in the way that we treated our Vietnam heroes on their homecoming. That is a wrong that we need to right.

As the member for Fowler, I now have the honour of representing one of the largest Vietnamese communities outside of Vietnam itself. As a consequence of that, Australia's involvement in the Vietnam War takes on a special significance. On 30 April this year, I attended a ceremony in Canberra to commemorate the 36th anniversary of the fall of Saigon to remember not only the Australians soldiers but also the many thousands of Vietnamese soldiers who died fighting for freedom and democracy. I had the opportunity to speak about the fall of Saigon to the communist forces and about what had occurred to the nation subsequent to that—for instance, the imprisonment of various Vietnamese people for essentially trying to exercise their own fundamental human rights—the human rights that Australians, New Zealanders and Americans were there supporting and trying to protect at the time of the Vietnamese conflict. At the time of the commemoration ceremonies of the fall of Saigon, I was advised of a march that was being planned by members of the Australian RSL and former Viet Cong soldiers. I reminded the crowd on that day that unlike the First and Second World Wars there was no repatriation for Vietnamese refugees. At the conclusion of the Vietnam war the communist government reacted quite cruelly to any of those it suspected of having stood up against it or assisted in efforts against the communist insurgency, to the point that people were placed in very inhumane concentration camps or, as they are colloquially referred to, re-education camps. The communist government's actions forced millions of Vietnamese to flee their country, many in boats. They would have been, from Australia's point of view, the first boat people. Regrettably, many hundreds of thousands of people did not survive that journey.

I am deeply concerned at human rights in Vietnam—it is something I have spoken of on many occasions in this parliament—because not only is it a continuation of past abuses of one's rights but also Australia, with its allies, fought in Vietnam to support and to protect the basic issues of freedom and democracy. Regrettably, these days people are accused of crimes such as supporting political groups not recognised by the state, criticising government policies, calling for democracy, even being interviewed by foreign journalists. Those matters are enough to subject you to a trial and, if found guilty, you are imprisoned. Our troops fought with distinction and with valour but they fought for Australia's interests to protect people from the insurgency of a communist regime. As a consequence they fought to protect those basic rights that we in our nation can freely enjoy.

Whilst I applaud every effort towards world peace and harmony, I believe, as I indicated on that day, that a parade by former Australian diggers who served in the Vietnam conflict alongside former Viet Cong guerrillas will send a very wrong message throughout our region. There has been a significant number of recorded abuses of human rights, continuing to this day, including more than 400 people incarcerated for trying to exercise their fundamental human rights. A parade will effectively say that you can continue to deny people their freedom and democracy whilst enjoying the support of a country such as Australia.

In March this year I was also invited to the unveiling of the newly renovated Vietnam War Comradeship Memorial at Cabravale Park, which is in my electorate at Cabramatta. I was invited there by the President of the New South Wales chapter of the Vietnamese Community in Australia, Mr Thanh Nguyen. The community I represent are so proud of all Australians and all those allied forces who went and fought valiantly on their behalf. They have been busy fundraising to ensure that the comradeship memorial stands with pride of place because they want to demonstrate in Australia how proud they are of people which o made the sacrifice on their behalf. The comradeship memorial commemorates the friendship and sacrifice shared between Australian and Vietnamese soldiers. I would like to acknowledge the hard work of the organising committee, among them Tri Vo, the project coordinator for the upgrade of the comradeship memorial, the presidents of the respective RSL clubs and the many Australian and Vietnamese war veterans who attend.

The Vietnam War is not going to be something we simply condemn to the history books; it is something that we will commemorate on the basis that it is a true example of the Anzac spirit. It is a defining moment not only in Australian military history but for the spirit of Australia itself. The 18th of August is a very significant day in Australia's national calendar. We commemorate and acknowledge the efforts, bravery, courage and commitment of all of those who fought for this country, whether they were regular soldiers or members of the national service. We should ensure that we speak about this each year in commemoration of Long Tan. Lest we forget.

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What marvellous recognition it would have been if my Vietnam veterans could have been here in this parliament in the last hour or so and heard the heartfelt addresses from the members for Macarthur, Fowler and Eden-Monaro. I could not even contemplate entering into the feelings that they have for their communities, especially the Vietnam vets community, but I am sure that if my Vietnam vets were here they would know that there are members in this place who remember what they did, determinedly work for their betterment through this parliament and their communities and do it with a passion and an understanding that they probably do not believe exists in this House. I want to commend them for that in the first instance and say, 'I recognise you.' As the member for Macarthur pointed out, when you have direct family pain such as he has been prepared to volunteer to the records of this parliament and you come into this place, it is great recognition not just for your father but for all the Vietnam vets who have felt alienated from the communities that they left to go to Vietnam and then returned to in difficult circumstances.

I had the great pleasure of being the debutant partner for Margaret Kennedy. Margaret Kennedy was the draper's daughter in Pakenham and I was from the neighbouring town of Koo-wee-rup. Those towns were sporting mortal enemies, but I had the great pleasure of being invited to escort this girl to make her debut. Her brother was Robert Kennedy. We called him 'Noddy'—Noddy was taller than most boys—and I was with him yesterday. But Noddy is not Noddy anymore; he is now 'Buzz'. We were different people in the 1960s. It was a wonderful time for all of us, but those who went off to Vietnam had a different experience. It was a distant war for us. We went on. I was not balloted. We got on with our lives. Buzz went through the Vietnam War and I met him yesterday as a member of the Vietnam Veterans Motorcycle Club's Gippsland chapter. Having grown up with my wife, Bronwyn, he was thrilled to see her there with all the other Vietnam vets. We remember that even in this House we had Tim Fischer and Rod Atkinson, who were returned soldiers. I do not know whether there were any others; someone might fill me in, I will get back to the office and someone will say there was someone else. There was Ron Edwards, the Western Australia member for Swan; I think it was Swan. I think that is correct.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was Cowan; he was the member for Cowan, of course. He came back with severe injuries but ended up in this House. So that is three that we can think of.

Yesterday there were many, many beautiful motorbikes. There were also a lot of fractured men and families. They were supported by God's Squad, and I should have said that Buzz is a patched member of the Vietnam Veterans Motorcycle Club chapter in Gippsland. I can only enter in but cannot understand how their fractured lives have affected all of them over those years and how they congregate around Harley-Davidsons. It is a lovely way to be, because they are with their own. They are in their comfort zone. Yesterday you would have been proud of every one of them, including Russell Oakes —'T Rat', as I have to call him—who was a president of the club. They had organised around their memorial and around their clubhouse there at the old Longwarry Hall, which they had made into a fantastic clubhouse. They had organised a whole ceremony to remember Vietnam Veterans Day and the Long Tan remembrance. In that, probably the most heartbreaking moment was when the words of the song I Was Only 19 were not sung but just read out as a poem. There were many tears that flowed in those few moments as that was read out. The sun was shining on a most glorious day in Gippsland—unusual with the wet we have had. So you can imagine the sparkling motorcycles surrounding this whole place. Not all the Vietnam veterans there came on motorbikes, you know; some came in cars. There were people like me, hangers on, that came along to the commemoration with them. But you felt a quiet comfort in the place as they remembered those fallen and as they remembered their mates who have fallen since and who have not made it into what we call old age—and there was a lot of grey hair yesterday; I think the boys would forgive me for saying that.

So I want to recognise one—not only the boys who were there yesterday at Longwarry but all the support that they have had around them from their loved ones that support them in what they do; all of the people that went away with them to support them and that were part of that conflict; and the Defence Force support that came from this nation for them. That probably has not been recognised either, but they know who helped them. I will come to a plea in a moment, but I will just say this to you: yesterday, as a member of parliament, you would have been proud to stand amongst those men at the Vietnam Veterans Motorcycle Club commemorations at Longwarry. It was a place where any member of this House would have been pleased to be standing. I know the former minister knows all about what I am talking about because he was the minister when much of these funds that were provided to this group were extended, allowing them to rebuild what they have done there at the moment. There is a bit of controversy right now over some money that is not going out to veterans in regard to welfare. I have raised that with the new minister and we are doing the best we possibly can. I admit that Victoria has had generous payments in regard to the welfare of veterans and that there has been a pull back. But I have a different set-up in Gippsland.

There are welfare agencies quite close to each other across parts of Australia and they may be duplicating services. Government always has a right to question its own expenditure—there is no doubt about that. However, South Gippsland has one service only and it goes from Wonthaggi all the way through the bottom country to Fish Creek, the Foster area, then right up to Korumburra and Leongatha—one service. I have been told there are some transitional funds, so I think in the process we can work through that for those transitional funds. In the north of my electorate, I do not have the same issue because there are welfare support groups for veterans all the way through. I think we will get a good outcome from the government on that. I have been in this parliament through a number of administrations and there has not been one administration in this place, from Hawke to Gillard, that I have been a part of that was not totally and absolutely supportive of the welfare of veterans, to the best of the government's financial ability. There has not been one Prime Minister who has not been in support of veterans, as best they possibly could in the financial straits of the government of the time. If we have failed veterans, we will take responsibility for that and endeavour in the processes into the future to support veterans and support them well.

Vietnam Veterans Day was a great celebration. I congratulate all at Longwarry. I congratulate all who played a part in its presentation. But the moment of excitement came when one training aeroplane from the Roulettes came straight out of the sunlight towards the clubhouse, twisting and turning and throwing itself up into the air to a complete stall, then dropping towards the clubhouse again, circling three times, rolling and then flinging itself back to sail—a fitting tribute that is only given to very special occasions.

Alan Griffin (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to honour our Vietnam veterans and to make some comments with respect to Vietnam Veterans Day and the Battle of Long Tan, and to remember all those who fought and those who died, and those who suffered as a result of our involvement in the Vietnam War. In the process, I will mention some of the people I have met in my time in this place, both as shadow minister and subsequently as Minister for Veterans' Affairs, where I have had the honour and the privilege to work with many members of the Vietnam veterans community.

Many speakers have spoken about the Battle of Long Tan and the nature of what occurred on that occasion, the tremendous courage and bravery of all those who fought as part of that engagement and who safeguarded the very real threat to the Australian base at Nui Dat, recently established, and the nature of the struggle that occurred subsequent to that time around the question of honours and recognition. I will not go into the detail of that other than to make a couple of comments about several of the individuals that were involved, to highlight those individuals as examples of the very fine men who fought on that occasion—and recognising them as representative takes nothing away from others whom I do not mention. I will then talk a bit more about some other broader points with respect to our involvement in the Vietnam War. I note the presence of the Minister for Veterans' Affairs prior to me, the honourable member for Dunkley.

You cannot really go past then Major—subsequently Lieutenant-Colonel retired—Harry Smith. Harry is someone who I have had a lot to do with over the years, as I know the member for Dunkley had, in what was for government a very difficult issue to deal with: the question of how to deal with recognition with respect to events long ago when we were but very young lads and when, it is acknowledged on all sides, things did not turn out the way they should have in terms of acknowledging the great courage and sacrifice that occurred.

Harry is an amazing bloke. He is as tough as nails, as hard as they come. There were times, it is fair to say—and I am prepared to say it now that I am not minister—he was bloody unreasonable. But, if I were ever in the dire situation that D Company was in, with its support units at that time, in that awful rank jungle, in that terrible driving rain, facing such a numerically superior force, I would have wanted someone like Harry Smith there to help me maintain what I needed to do in the circumstances. I have no doubt—from dealing with him over the years with respect to the outstanding matters which relate to acknowledging his men for what they did—that he is a man of enormous conviction, enormous courage and the sort of guts that a lot of people in this place, me included, can only dream about.

Harry remains committed to continuing to focus on and fight for recognition for a number of his men who he feels have not been recognised. I welcome the recent granting of the unit citation as long overdue recognition. It took a long time to get to the stage of being able to have the presentation. There were certainly issues around that, but I will not go to that today. I know from speaking to Harry very recently that those other issues remain outstanding and he remains concerned with aspects of the decisions taken at the Defence Honours and Awards Tribunal. I think there are issues around the operation of the Defence Honours and Awards Tribunal. Several issues have come before it where there have been legitimate concerns raised. I think it has an incredibly complex role to play dealing with outstanding matters of recognition, but I think it is also time for that tribunal to be reviewed. It has been in operation for long enough for that to occur, and it would be a positive step forward to ensure that a tribunal which does, by and large, a very good and important job is meeting the requirements that the government had when it was established.

I also mention Captain Morrie Stanley, who, as other speakers have mentioned, recently passed away. Then Captain Morrie Stanley was the forward artillery observer attached to the artillery, a Kiwi and a man who directed some 61 artillery fire missions into the site over 3½ hours in the most desperate times and the most appalling conditions. Morrie was able to be granted the unit citation in the time before his passing. Morrie Stanley was a modern epitome of the great linkage between Australia and New Zealand that dates back to the time of Gallipoli and he was a man that was enormously respected by those he worked with. No doubt, given the work he did at that time, his professionalism, his dedication and his skill saved many Australian lives. One other person I would mention in passing—again, someone who would be known to the former minister—is Lieutenant Adrian Roberts, who was in charge of the APCs that arrived in support of D Company. Adrian is one of the people whose individual acts of valour I do not believe have been sufficiently recognised. He came back a man suffering from the circumstances of his service but, always dedicated to helping others, he became involved in the TPI association and served fellow TPIs with great distinction in some of the years since.

I recently came back from Afghanistan. I was talking to a bunch of young blokes at Tarin Kowt, who were serving, and a young bloke came up to me and said, 'I think you might know my grandfather.' He was in fact Adrian's grandson serving in a very similar unit and therefore following on a great tradition. He is a young bloke whom I am sure Adrian is very proud of, and I believe Adrian has every right to be incredibly proud of him.

But it was not just Long Tan. This was a day to recognise the tremendous courage, sacrifice and service of the more than 60,000 who served in Vietnam and the region throughout the conflict. It is a time to recognise that it was not just the Army; it was also the Air Force and it was also the Navy. It is a time to recognise that, although more than 500 died and more than 2,400 were wounded, many others have returned and have suffered from their service. It is a time to acknowledge that service. It is a time to recognise that these men did what they were asked to do on behalf of the governments of the day and many suffered in silence for years afterwards. It is important to recognise that at that time it was a difficult situation in Australian society in dealing with the issues of that conflict—partly, in my view, because it was in effect the first TV war. In those circumstances, the issues we deal with today, with the sorts of reporting that we now almost take for granted, were in fact incredibly new at that time. We were not used to seeing the sorts of scenes that were coming across our TV screens on a nightly basis. We as a society, and frankly our political leaders, were not able to understand at the time or reflect properly on the reality of that and what it meant for a society dealing with the circumstances around a conflict of that nature. I think that that impacted on those who went, their families at home and the broader community and we did a disservice, as a nation, to those who returned in those circumstances.

But rather than focus on that I would like to focus on some aspects of what has happened since then that really highlight the great courage and camaraderie of many of those who went. I will briefly speak about a particular group of individuals who served in the Vietnam War who were also very familiar to the former minister, those around Operation Aussies Home. People like Jim Bourke and Peter Aylett, who never forgot that there were some six individuals who were missing in action subsequent to our involvement in that war; people who remembered that and never forgot; people who have dedicated in recent years a lot of their time, money and efforts to doing all they could to bring those men home. The work that they did has been acknowledged in this place before, but I am very pleased to acknowledge it again today. Jim and Peter in particular are two of that group whom I know reasonably well. Again, they are tough old so-and-sos. They are as gutsy as they come—dry and funny when they want to be and determined and tough when they have to be. It has been a great privilege for me to have known them over these years and to have worked with them. And I am sure that the former minister, the member for Dunkley, would share those sentiments. The work that they did ensured that the Defence Force followed on from that in a manner which ensured that the remains of those brave servicemen, the last of our remains from Vietnam, were returned home over a number of occasions, starting in effect with Parker and Gillson, under the time of the member for Dunkley as minister, through, in my time, to John Gillespie, David Fisher, and then on to Herbert and Carver, the last two who were returned home. Jim Bourke is now working on getting a PhD at a university in Melbourne. I now call him professor and he is now looking at the very issue of what this means in respect of what occurred at the time and also what it means about the efforts to understand remembrance and the work that was done to return these men home. I think his work and the work of those like Peter Aylett with him is in fact work that we can all be very, very proud of.

Dick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It being 6.30 pm, in accordance with standing order 192 the debate is interrupted. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the motion that is in my name. The New South Wales north coast has endured floods, damaging winds and torrential rain on a number of occasions in the last two years. The unusually wet weather in late 2010 and early 2011 has devastated our local sugar industry. Many farmers planted crops twice and lost both crops to the wet weather, leaving them with no possibility of a harvest but still out of pocket because of the substantial cost of planting. There are currently some 6,000 hectares of land in northern New South Wales which should be covered with sugar cane but lie unplanted. The New South Wales Canegrowers Association is working with the affected parts of the industry to develop solutions to this problem.

I am calling on the government to match the assistance provided to the Queensland and Victorian farmers following the natural disasters in those states. New South Wales's support measures currently fall some $10,000 short of the assistance available for farmers in Queensland and Victoria, who are able to access up to $25,000 re-establishment assistance in flood declared areas. Unlike in other areas, New South Wales sugar cane is primarily a two-year crop, so the impact of poor conditions in late 2010 will flow through until at least 2012. Canegrowers New South Wales estimates that the 2012 harvest could be 50 per cent lower as a result of poor weather. Canegrowers in northern New South Wales have been forced to take on short-term financing of $1,000 per hectare at a 7 per cent interest rate with the loans to be repaid from the proceeds of the coming crop—an example of the local industry attempting to help itself in a very difficult situation. Unfortunately the crops around Broadwater and Harwood are expected to be the worst in 50 years. Without decent crops in the next couple of years the viability of the cane industry in New South Wales will certainly be called into question.

In northern New South Wales sugar cane is a major driver of local economies. Money from sugar cane operations flows through the many different suppliers in towns like Maclean, Yamba and Grafton. The sugar cane industry is one of the region's biggest employers and accounts for $230 million of economic output each year; total direct and indirect employment in the industry is estimated at some 2,200 people. This includes 600 cane farmers and 150 seasonal harvesting workers. The sugar mills provide employment for 450 people. I have been advised that these mills are currently operating at a loss due to the difficulty in conditions and increased costs.

The cane industry in New South Wales is broken into three regions with each region have a milling facility. Should the tonnage from any of the mill areas fall below sustainability levels, this would bring into question the future operations of those mills. It is vitally important that we maintain the critical mass of product flowing through those mills to retain our industry in the long term. The New South Wales Canegrowers Association put forward a plan which they believed would assist the industry to get back on its feet and assure the sustainability of sugar in northern New South Wales. They estimate that about 6,070 hectares needs to be replanted and, to put this in perspective, that is the equivalent of around 8,900 football fields with the estimated cost of replanting being some $10 million. The industry acknowledges that some losses are manageable and come with the territory, come with what it means to be a farmer; however, the industry also believes that the record adverse events in 2010 and 2011 result in the requirement for a comparatively small amount of government intervention to help get the industry back on its feet.

The industry has put forward a proposal to the government with two important elements. The first problem is the inequity in the disaster assistance provided to canegrowers in New South Wales, and I have touched on that inequity between Queensland and New South Wales. Their second proposal is a package involving a partnership between the Australian government, the New South Wales government and the cane growing industry. The industry is proposing that the cost of replanting be funded equally between the two levels of government and individual growers, and predicts a maximum replanting cost of $1,750 a hectare, with an independent auditing program to ensure the integrity of the scheme. The New South Wales Cane Growers Association met with the member for Page, Janelle Saffin, on 12 July to present its case. However, we are yet to hear of a response from the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Sugarcane is generally planted in September and October, and this means we must get the issue sorted out in the next few weeks if we are to avoid irreparable damage to the New South Wales sugar industry.

These weather related problems in New South Wales are further challenges for Australian industry at a time when many sectors are struggling with increased costs and difficult trading conditions. Manufacturing in Australia is already struggling due to a range of factors. BlueScope steel announced today that it will cut 1,000 jobs and close one of its blast furnaces due to difficult conditions. Recently OneSteel announced it will shed 400 jobs. AWU National Secretary Paul Howes said we are 'facing a major crisis in Australian manufacturing'. Businesses around Australia are facing very difficult trading conditions indeed. The high Aussie dollar is hurting exporters, consumer confidence is low and households are saving more money. Wasteful government spending is helping to keep interest rates higher than they would otherwise be.

Instead of working with Australian industries to protect Australian jobs and growing Australian businesses the government is pressing ahead with plans to introduce a carbon tax that will push up the cost of electricity and transport. This particularly affects our cane industry, where transport is such a major factor in the cost of production. Businesses in Australia are crying out for support and a fair go. Instead the government is waging war on Australian businesses and Australian jobs by introducing new taxes, reregulating the labour market and mismanaging government programs. I met recently with cane growers to discuss the impact of the carbon tax. They were deeply concerned about the impact of this tax, particularly on the cost of transport and of operating local sugar mills.

It is clear that the Gillard government does not have the will or the competence to support Australian industries. The New South Wales cane industry desperately needs help from the Australian government to ensure its long-term prosperity. We still await a response from the minister, and I note that the member for Page is in the chamber and will be speaking shortly on this matter. I call on the parliament to support this motion. Hundreds of jobs and local businesses are at stake. Certainly the vibrant, long-term future of the cane industry is very much at stake at this very difficult time.

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am speaking tonight in support of local cane growers. It is a significant industry in my area and I want to outline some of the assistance and some of the work that I have been able to do with them. It would be nice for once to come together and work together in this place for the good of the community and for the good of industry, and I wish the honourable member for Cowper were fair dinkum on this and not playing games with it. I suspect that that is not how it is, so it makes it difficult to say: 'Yes, let's get together. Let's work in the best interests of cane growers on the North Coast.' I have certainly done that, because it is a significant industry in my area.

I met with the cane growers recently and meet with them all the time. They also wrote to me earlier this year. Mr Andrew Tickle, the General Secretary of the NSW Cane Growers Council, said:

I appreciate the efforts you have made on these issues to date, including arranging the meeting between industry representatives and the federal Attorney-General, the Hon. Robert McClelland MP, at Greenridge Hall near Casino in January.

Further quoting:

Your early action in seeking NDRA—

I think it means NDRRA—

declarations for the local government areas in northern New South Wales has also been greatly appreciated by all cane growers.

Speaking to that point, it is up to the state government to make the declaration of natural disaster; then the federal assistance kicks in. It was during the period when we had the floods. There were about seven floods in my area in Northern Rivers of varying degrees—major, minor and moderate—as there were across the North Coast area. I was able to hop onto the phone and ring anybody I could at the state level and federal level and say, 'I want these natural disaster declarations as soon as we can'. I knew that the sugar industry would be impacted and I wanted them to have access, as other farmers and small business do, to what we commonly call the cash grants. I wanted to make sure that that happened. That was not something I advertised, but it became known—hence, the thanks in the letter.

I have met with the cane growers since. When I look at the honourable member for Cowper's seven-point motion, points one, two, three, four and five are straight forward. When you come to number six, it talks about the amount of cash available—the $15,000 and $25,000—it is up to the state government to ask the federal government to increase that assistance. That is how it works. It has worked like that for a long time and we can come into this place, we can get into the media and we can talk about that as much as we like, but that is the system that exists. It just muddies the waters if we are not accurate in how we talk about that. It is up to the state government. Whether it was the previous state government, which was a Labor government, or the now coalition government, it is an issue that I have always said had to be taken up with the state government and the state members. That is absolutely clear.

On the other issue, the cane growers did put up a novel proposal for seeking assistance for planting at any level. In their submission they talk about having two crook seasons. There have actually been three major weather events in total over the last four years that have impacted on the sugar cane farmers. That is what they were asking for. I also had written to the Hon. Katrina Hodgkinson, the Minister for Primary Industries and Minister for Small Business. I have a recent letter from her where she said, 'Thank you for the representations on behalf of the New South Wales cane growers.' They wanted me to write to her on the issue of increasing the category C NDRRA Grant from $15,000 to $25,000 and seeking financial support for the replanting of sugar cane. I knew that the state members in my area had done that. I was asked by the cane growers to do it. I was happy to do it, although that is normally within their bailiwick to do.

I received another letter back from her. The minister says that she is extremely sympathetic to the concerns raised. She said she has had various meetings with local members to discuss these issues and she has also encouraged them to discuss it with the federal minister. That is what we have been doing—discussing it with both. I did not want to do this. I was not bringing partisan politics into this; I was just playing an absolutely straight bat in trying to get the best deal I could for the cane growers. The motion the honourable member for Cowper has put here tonight forces me to bring this in here. It is not what I wanted to do. I just want to see what we can do for them.

There is a letter here that the honourable Minister Katrina Hodgkinson enclosed for me. It is to Mr Andrew Tickle, the General Secretary of the New South Wales Cane Growers' Association, to his address at Wardell. I also meet with Mr Tickle as well on behalf of the New South Wales cane growers. In the letter, among other things, the minister says about the $15,000:

The level of assistance is determined on the impact of the disaster on whole communities and implemented to address the longer term holistic community recovery following a severe natural disaster. The floods in Queensland were very extensive and of a greater magnitude than those experienced in New South Wales and in many cases reached historical record water height levels resulting in extreme flood damage. Therefore the maximum eligible level of support as determined by the national NDRRA was activated in Queensland.

The letter goes on to outline what is available under the scheme and advises members to contact Mr Rik Whitehead, who is the Assistant Regional Director, North Coast Department of Primary Industries, or the New South Wales Rural Assistance Authority for assistance.

It is really clear what the state minister is saying about that issue of the $15,000 or $25,000 and there have been two natural disasters where the honourable member for Cowper has been in the media saying we should get extra money. One was when the Labor government was in at state level and now there is this one, with the coalition government. It is up to them to ask. That is the way the scheme works and I am not sure the honourable member for Cowper understands that. It is up to them to ask and then it can kick in. The minister has been quoted on that point—and when I say minister, I mean the minister at the federal level.

There is one issue I discussed with the local cane growers and also with the Rural Assistance Authority, the body at state level that administers all of these programs. I asked the RAA: 'Is is possible to have a collective loan? There are $130,000 concessional grants—is it possible to have that done in a collective way?' I thought it had happened before, but they said it was not possible. In fact it had happened once before, but for a whole range of reasons it did not work out—the money did not get paid back and it was harder to get money back in that system. That was an example of trying to think a bit outside the square.

Just recently, the New South Wales Sugar Milling Co-operative Chief Executive Officer, Chris Connors, announced the start of the Grower Loan Planting Assistance Scheme, which is being offered in partnership with the Manildra Group. This scheme will offer plant loan assistance of $1,000 per hectare and will be available to all cane planted this year and next year. This is in my local paper, the Northern Star, and it was also in the Daily Examiner. Wayne Rogers, a grower and Chairman of the Richmond River Cane Growers Association, said the initiative was necessary because many people had attempted to plant at least twice last season without success. He said:

They had incurred significant cost but had nothing to show for it.

The scheme is a great initiative and one that they have taken themselves.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise tonight to speak in support of this motion introduced by my colleague the member for Cowper. I have been quite interested to sit here listening to the contribution from the member for Page. While I do not doubt her concern and empathy for the cane growers on the North Coast, I am afraid that does not help them out of their predicament. The member for Page should note that this motion calls on the government to take action to help the cane growers in northern New South Wales. We have heard a monologue on the member for Page's activities and on letters she has written, but it missed the point: that governments can make this happen. The frustration the cane growers have is that, while they are seeing money squandered elsewhere—in home insulation programs and double priced school halls and a whole range of other things—when something comes up and they really need the funds—

Ms Saffin interjecting—

I sat silently, Member for Page, during your contribution. When something comes up and we need some decisive action, the money is not there and we get excuses. There is a precedent for this. In 2000, a major rainfall event went through western New South Wales and, at the point of harvest, decimated the wheat crop. The Deputy Speaker would have been a member here at the time and may remember it, as someone involved in agricultural activities. It was devastating—right at the point of harvest, in early December. The then Deputy Prime Minister immediately instigated $60,000 in replanting grants. That was a huge benefit, to not only those farmers but the entire community and Australia as a whole. It was not welfare. It was not benefits. It was not relief payments. It was an investment by the Australian government in its food producers. I would say that the money that went into those farmers in that wet harvest, that replanting grant, would have been repaid in taxation 10 times over in the next couple of years by stopping those farmers going to the wall. And it is not only the farmers that it goes through. A replanting grant—and that is what the Member for Cowper is speaking about—flows through to the agricultural suppliers and the contractors. And having that cash going through helps to keep that core number of people in a community so that you can keep services like education, medicine and all those things going.

I, too, am disappointed sometimes at the misguided nature of the finance coming out of this government. My electorate also suffered, largely through the floods at Christmas time. Indeed, parts of my electorate, communities and individual farms, were underwater or surrounded by water for two or three months. They received no funds. And now some of them, who had received Centrelink payments, have been asked to return them. There are farmers who had come through eight or nine years of drought who, on the point of harvest, were completely wiped out. I flew over thousands and thousands of acres of unharvested wheat standing in water; that wheat will never be harvested. A replanting grant at that point would have been very useful as well. But it was not forthcoming, and so those communities now are really suffering a cash shortage.

So I support the member for Cowper's motion here. I am not a cane farmer, but I understand that cane is a very intensive crop. It is very expensive to get established and to plant. And it is a little bit unusual, and different from the crops that I am used to, in that it lasts in a two-year rotation. So when an event wipes out the crop, as this one has, it is very expensive to replant, and the consequences of that flow through for not one but several years.

The member for Cowper has every right to come into this place and speak up for the farmers on those issues. And if the member for Page is offended by that, or needs to apologise for the inaction of the government on that, then I am disappointed because I would have thought that it was the role of all in this place to bring to light, to the Australian Parliament, the issues that concern the people they represent.

So I am concerned about the priorities of this government when money seems to be bountiful for some things and very tight for others. We speak a lot in this place of food security and climate change and looking after the environment, but here is an opportunity to actually do something practical. And it is not just about funding these farmers to plant a crop. If these farmers are forced off their land, if they have to sell out because they are in a financial bind, then years of expertise—sometimes two or three generations of expertise—is also forced off that land. And that becomes a problem because quite often the land is bought up by corporate investors who have no idea about growing cane. One of the great frustrations in here to me, as someone with an agriculture background, is that, in some quarters, there is no recognition of the skill that farmers have. It is as if they are a tradeable commodity, so that if someone goes off a place and leaves the land we will just replace them with someone else. While many farmers have tertiary degrees, many do not. They gain knowledge and skills from the time they are knee-high and following their father and grandfather around the farm until they finally take control of the farm themselves. That will be the real loss here. It is not just about $15,000 or $25,000 for a replanting grant. The real loss will be if these people decide: 'This is just too hard. We will cash this out. We will sell our cane farm to a developer. They might turn it into a Club Med or an ecovillage or put in some ski boats down by the Clarence. There is good money in that, and we will buy a unit at Yamba and watch the Pacific Ocean.' That is not a bad outcome, except that the expertise of these people, their productivity and the dollars they give and have given over the generations to their community, to the state of New South Wales and to this country will be lost. It is appalling that for just a few dollars—we are not talking about a large number of farmers—their situation could be alleviated.

I understand why the member for Cowper has brought forward this motion. He understands how difficult it is for people in Australia who are running their own business, particularly those who are running an agricultural business, when mother nature throws a double whammy at them and puts them in a place they have not been before financially. When this happens, it is very nice to think that the government of this land can make their future and the future of the community in which they live a priority.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Parkes may understand why the member for Cowper has brought this motion before the House; but, please forgive me, I do not. But I do understand the area that the member for Cowper represents because I have lived there longer than he has. So I really do understand the issues surrounding this motion. I suspect, knowing the good people of Cowper the way I do, that if they had a member who really concentrated on honestly putting forward their case they would be a lot happier with the member for Cowper than they would be with him getting up in this parliament and sprouting rhetoric.

You might ask: why did the federal government give only $15,000? It was because that is what they were asked to give. They delivered what they were asked to give. Now we have the member for Cowper standing up in this parliament and playing politics by saying, 'The cane growers should have been given $25,000,' when only $15,000 was asked of the federal government. The federal government delivered what they were asked to deliver, and it is very dishonest of the member for Cowper to stand up here and try to make any other argument. What we need to do is separate fact from fiction.

I agree wholeheartedly with the member for Parkes: every member has the right to stand up here and speak on behalf of the people they represent, but let us do it in a way that is honest and that delivers a quality debate. Let us talk about the issue as it really is, not how we would like it to be. Let us not put things on the record just to score political points; rather, let us see what we can do to really help those cane farmers whose livelihoods have been devastated by these most horrendous conditions. I would attribute the abnormal wet weather to climate change; the member for Cowper would be, I think, denying its existence. We have had many adverse weather events in the area that I come from. I must say that, if the member for Cowper were prepared to support the government in putting a price on carbon so that the 500 biggest polluting industries were held to account for their behaviour, then maybe, just maybe, there would not be as many devastating climate events. I know there has been a very long period of time in the northern part of New South Wales in which there have been very adverse weather conditions and an enormous increase in the rainfall in the area, and this has had a devastating effect on the industry. I would just like to go through a few points in relation to this. Under the Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements, each individual state determines the level of assistance to be paid, subject to caps agreed between the Commonwealth and the state. Why doesn't the member for Cowper argue that? For clean-up and recovery grants for small business and farmers, often referred to as category C grants, the NDRRA clearly provides that the Commonwealth will meet half the cost up to $25,000. This can consist of tier 1 clean-up and recovery grants of up to $5,000, not requiring any proof of damage or expenditure, and tier 2 grants of up to $20,000 for small businesses and primary producers.

I hope the member for Cowper is listening to this because it is a very important point. The government has made it clear that it is willing to meet its share of the cost of grants up to the maximum amount. That is not what the member for Cowper tells this parliament. The government has done so following the recent devastating natural disasters in Queensland, Victoria and Western Australia. It is up to the New South Wales government to determine the level of assistance they believe is to be provided and therefore the level of assistance they should be seeking from the Commonwealth. The member for Cowper should talk to his mates down in Macquarie Street and ask them to support him, not bring it up here in the federal parliament. He needs to get his National Party mates and Premier Barry O'Farrell to support him. As I said earlier, $15,000 was the amount of money that was asked for and $15,000 was what the government delivered.

The NDRRA assistance for the December 2010-January 2011 flooding was made available for 13 local government areas. Included in that were a number that fall within the member for Cowper's electorate, including Bellingen, and the electorates north of Cowper. The money that was given to these local government areas was for personal hardship and distress assistance; certain counter-disaster operations; restoration of essential public assets; concessional loans of up to $130,000 for small businesses and primary producers; concessional loans of up to $25,000 for voluntary and not-for-profit organisations, who really stepped up to the plate at that time and provided assistance and support on the ground for those people who had been adversely affected; transport freight subsidies of up to $15,000 to assist primary producers for the carriage of livestock and fodder; and clean-up and recovery grants of up to $15,000, which the member for Cowper would like to see capped at $25,000, when that was not even asked for.

The member for Cowper comes in here, he argues one way, he puts forward a point of view that really is not based on fact and he expects this parliament to take him seriously. Come on. We just cannot take anything that the member for Cowper says seriously when he comes in here and does not tell the true story, does not paint the picture as it is. The government has already responded to Mr Andrew Tickle, the General Secretary of the New South Wales Cane Growers' Association. In his motion I think the member for Cowper refers to the fact that the government has responded, but the motion has been moved. As a National Party member, he voted against the flood levy which would have assisted the people he represents in this parliament. The flood levy would have supported his communities and helped them in the recovery and reconstruction after the devastating floods.

It is up to the New South Wales government. He needs to talk to his mates in Macquarie Street to get it sorted out. He should not come in here trying to blame the federal government for the ineptitude of his colleagues in New South Wales. Just so that the member for Cowper is aware of this the next time he raises an issue such as this, natural disaster management is a state and territory responsibility under the Constitution. Each jurisdiction determines the criteria and the level of assistance provided to individuals and communities affected by natural disasters.

I am disappointed that the member for Cowper did not even do the basic research need so that he could come in here and honestly debate this legislation. The cane growers of northern New South Wales have my 100 per cent support. I know they have done it tough and they really deserve a member who comes down here and argues effectively for them.

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made and order of the day at the next sitting.

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As an economics professor at the Australian National University, one of the people I admired most was Bob Gregory, one of Australia's most creative minds. As well as being a great thinker, Bob is also one of the last people in Australia to contract polio. In an interview with William Coleman he talks about what happened in 1953, when he contracted polio at age 14. Bob said:

One day in April I was training for football on a Tuesday and I began to feel stiff and I had to go home. The next day I had to leave school and go to bed. The doctor came and said to Mum, 'He's either got the flu or polio.' Polio was a very bad thing: people died or might be paralysed for life. It attacked lots of children. By Friday my leg wasn't better, so I went to hospital. I felt fine (apart from flu symptoms) and I was optimistic. In bed you don't know you can't walk. It was only after 14 days when they got me out of bed that I discovered that I could not walk. Then I spent nine months in bed. They strap you to an iron frame, your feet are in plaster casts and then your parents take you out of the frame twice a day and exercise you for half an hour. So my father, before and after a hard day's work, had to exercise me. He could move my affected foot but I could not. It remained still. Some days I would say, 'Ooh, I think I can move a toe or I think I can feel something' but I couldn't really. It must have been heartbreaking for them.

Polio vaccination in Australia started a few years after Bob contracted the disease. But given that he contracted it, he was pretty lucky; he only walks today with a leg brace. Many polio victims require walking sticks or a wheelchair to get around. The motion I move today calls for one of the most significant public health opportunities of our time—the eradication of polio. Over the past quarter century the total number of polio cases worldwide has been reduced by 99 per cent, from 350,000 in 1988 to just 1,349 cases in 2010. Most regions of the world are free of the disease thanks to major immunisation efforts. I particularly commend the efforts of successive Australian governments, working with multilateral non-government organisations, such as Rotary International and other national governments, in wiping out polio in the Pacific.

Today there are just four countries where polio remains endemic: Afghanistan, Nigeria, India and Pakistan. Three of these are Commonwealth nations. All Commonwealth countries, including Australia, have a stake in the elimination of the disease, and the opportunity to end suffering has never been greater. A study published in The Lancet in 2007 showed that the cost of eradicating polio once and for all is billions of dollars less than the cost of merely keeping infection levels where they are now. The world has seen that infectious disease can be eradicated through targeted immunisation programs. Smallpox was responsible for an estimated 300 million to 500 million deaths during the 20th century. The late Australian microbiologist Professor Frank Fenner and his team were instrumental in eradicating smallpox in its last African strongholds in the late 1970s. Professor Fenner described announcing the eradication of smallpox to the UN's World Health Assembly in 1988 as the proudest moment of his long career. By eradicating smallpox we no longer have to vaccinate young children, and as someone who myself received the smallpox vaccine as a young boy, when we were travelling to South-East Asia, I can attest that it was a pretty painful vaccination to receive.

In all of human history, only one other infectious disease has ever been completely eradicated. The UN announced the eradication of cattle disease Rinderpest in June this year. Again, we stand on the cusp of a great breakthrough. Endemic polio has been contained to the smallest geographical area in history. Polio surveillance is at an unprecedented high. In 2009 alone, more than 361 million children were immunised in 40 countries as part of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative. Yet the initiative currently faces a funding shortfall of US$590 million for the full implementation of its 2010-12 polio eradication and strategic plan. Failure to meet the financial requirements of eradication is a failure to protect future generations from the debilitating effects of polio paralysis.

I call upon the government to support efforts to deliver a polio-free world and to advocate for the inclusion of a strong statement, urging Commonwealth countries to strengthen immunisation systems, including for polio, in the finally communique of the 2011 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. In closing, , let me just pay my thanks to Huw Pohlner, an intern in my office this week, who provided me with invaluable assistance in preparing these remarks.

Karen Andrews (McPherson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak about polio, the impact that the disease has on the lives of those affected and the remarkable efforts of the Gold Coast Polio Support Group, and in particular its convenor, Lyn Glover. Polio is a devastating disease that has historically affected thousands of people worldwide. People of all ages can contract this crippling and potentially fatal disease. However, it mainly affects children under the age of five that have not received appropriate immunisation. The majority of infected people have no symptoms or very mild symptoms which can usually go undetected. These people become carriers of the disease. In contrast, there are other people who can display the common symptoms, including signs of fatigue, a fever, headaches, nausea, stiffness in the neck and pain in the limbs. In some cases, infections can lead to irreversible paralysis and this usually occurs in the legs. The virus spreads through the central nervous system and destroys nerves responsible for activating muscles. Without the activation of these muscles, the limbs becomes quite limp. In most extreme cases, paralysis can result in quadriplegia.

There is a remarkable polio survivor living in my electorate of McPherson who contracted paralytic poliomyelitis back in 1958, on her fifth birthday. Lyn Glover was immunised when she was five years old, yet only a few days later she was diagnosed with polio and put into isolation, away from her family and friends. She was placed in a steel cot and could not walk for three years following the diagnosis. The pain and bullying she endured is still strong in her mind today. Lyn, like many others, is concerned that the people who contracted polio many years ago are now experiencing the late effects of polio. Post-polio syndrome has been emerging in sufferers at a later stage in their lives. Like Lyn, there are many other polio survivors suffering unaccustomed fatigue, muscle weakness, muscle and joint pain, loss of mobility, increased sensitivity to the cold, sleeping difficulty and the declining ability to perform basic daily activities. Many polio survivors find it hard to find the right support for these symptoms, as many GPs have limited understanding of the condition and are unable to offer much advice or treatment in this area. This has led to the need for a dedicated polio advocacy service here in Australia. As I mentioned earlier, Lyn Glover is the convener of the Gold Coast Post Polio Support Group that operates in conjunction with the Queensland Spinal Injuries Association. There are 25 members at present and these numbers have been increasing along with the community's awareness. The group meets to discuss with other like-minded individuals the issues they face on a daily basis and through this group they are able to support one another in a truly unique way. As a means to inspire other members, Lyn organises outings for the group and has organised a wellness retreat on the Sunshine Coast for April next year. Lyn was recently recognised for her outstanding contribution to the community when she received a Gold Coast City Council division 11 community service award. I congratulate Lyn for this achievement.

Polio is endemic in Afghanistan, Nigeria, India and Pakistan. In these countries the condition of sewerage services and contaminated water contributes to spreading this cruel disease. It is truly heartbreaking to see young children in these poorer countries with little or no mobility or aid to assist them with their daily activities. It is very confronting to see images of these children with crooked limbs and contorted bodies suffering. It is these images that have prompted worldwide attention to push for global eradication. Although we live in a country where we are not confronted with these images on a daily basis, we need to be aware that there are sufferers amongst us who have endured years of pain and isolation. Sadly, there is no cure for polio. There are some treatments aimed at reducing the severity of symptoms. However, the rarity of this condition in our country makes finding these treatments a trying task. I commend the efforts of polio support groups in assisting sufferers through these challenges.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to congratulate the member for Fraser for bringing this really important motion to the House and the member for McPherson for her contribution to the debate. She identified the fact that here in Australia we are now experiencing a wave of people who are suffering from the late effects of polio and that GPs are not familiar with polio and its late effects. It can quite often be passed over fairly easily.

My grandfather had polio. He died when I was about 10 or 11. I remember that he had callipers on his legs, which restricted the way he could get around. I also know that the mother of the member for Ballarat suffered from polio. It really was endemic here in Australia. People of my age were the first generation in this country that did not have to fear contracting polio. I remember the vaccinations first started coming out when I was in school. We lined up, were given the jab and that was the start of the eradication of polio in this country. The member for Fraser is saying that it should not finish with what is happening here in Australia. We should work to see polio eradicated globally. We cannot be comfortable in the knowledge that polio is not prevalent in our society here in Australia until it has been eradicated globally.

It is a crippling and potentially fatal infectious disease. Many people lost their lives or had their lives changed irreparably because they contracted polio. It is highly infectious and is caused by a virus. Polio is one of a limited number of diseases that only affect humans. A safe, effective and inexpensive vaccine exists that will lead to eradication. Immunity is lifelong and the virus can only survive for a very short period of time. Studies of the cost-effectiveness of polio eradication have demonstrated that it is feasible to work to control and eradicate it because it is much more cost effective to make sure that polio no longer is a disease that can affect anyone throughout the world. Given the current rates of routine immunisation and the relative weakness of the health systems in many parts of the world's countries like those identified in the motion by the member for Fraser—Afghanistan, Nigeria, India and Pakistan—and given that their health systems are not as robust as our health system, it makes it all the more important for us as a nation to support those countries. The global project, the end of polio campaign, was launched on 25 July. It is a 100-day campaign. It is timed to coincide with the lead-up to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth between 28 and 30 October. It is a campaign that all Australians should get behind because the eradication of this debilitating disease, polio, is imperative not only for Australia but globally. I would also like to acknowledge the fine work that is being done by non-government organisations. Rotary International are mentioned in this particular motion by the member for Fraser. I would like to acknowledge the work that they have done in contributing to the eradication of polio.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to support this motion. Historically, polio has been the world's greatest cause of disability and still today there is no cure. The best protection is prevention. Polio is a debilitating disease which can cause paralysis within hours, paralysis which is almost always irreversible. In severe cases the disease attaches to the motor neurons of the brain stem, which causes breathing difficulty and can lead to death. In the next 40 years more than 10 million children will be paralysed if the world does not capitalise on its US$5 billion global investment in eradication.

In 1985 Rotary International, a wonderful organisation, launched PolioPlus, a program which has been described as the most ambitious undertaking in Rotary's history. Through PolioPlus Rotary has raised more than US$800 million worldwide and is currently working to raise an additional US$200 million towards a US$355 million challenge grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. I acknowledge the work in my electorate of Riverina of all the Rotary clubs within District 9700, which have worked hard to raise money for this most worthwhile cause. Rotary has also led the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, in conjunction with the World Health Organisation, UNICEF and the US Centers for Disease Control. Since 1985, more than two billion children have been immunized through this initiative. Two billion children have been given a great start against the possibility of contracting polio. The Global Polio Eradication Initiative objectives are to interrupt transmission of the wild polio virus as soon as possible, to achieve certification of global polio eradication and to contribute to health systems development and strengthening routine immunisation and surveillance for communicable diseases in a systematic way. With the vaccinations offered through the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, more than five million people who would otherwise have been paralysed are walking today because they have been immunised. This shows the effectiveness of the immunisation and how important it is that the initiative's work continues. The PolioPlus program is recognised internationally for its use of public-private cooperation in pursuit of a humanitarian goal. I wish to extend my thanks to Rotary for their wonderful work in this area. In 2008 Dr Margaret Chan, the Director-General of the World Health Organisation, announced that polio eradication was the organisation's top priority. She stated:

As an international community, we have few opportunities to do something that is unquestionably good for every country and every child, in perpetuity. Polio eradication is one of these opportunities.

Through the WHO's ongoing work in 2009 more than 361 million children were immunised in 40 countries during 273 supplementary immunisation activities. In 2010 only four countries in the world remained polio-endemic, down from more than 125 countries in 1988. These countries are Afghanistan, India, Nigeria and Pakistan. This is a great achievement, but work must continue to help vaccinate children, particularly in these polio-prone countries. It is also heartening to learn that as of 12 August 2011 Kazakhstan has passed 12 months with no reported polio cases. However, it takes only one child to remain infected and children in all countries are at risk of contracting polio. In 2009-10, 23 previously polio-free countries were reinfected due to imports of the virus. This is a disease we must remain constantly vigilant against, and I urge everyone who can do anything to eradicate polio to do what they can to prevent this disease from spreading and to ensure that immunisation prevents any children or adults from becoming infected in the future.

Laura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to be able to speak on this motion today and give my support to the campaign for a polio-free future. I also commend the efforts of the member for Fraser in bringing this matter to the attention of this place and for raising its profile, along with the efforts of so many others who I know are campaigning vigorously on such an important issue.

We know that polio mainly affects children under the age of five and that one in 200 infections leads to irreversible paralysis. This has profound effects on children in the developing world; it has profound effects on their families and their communities and the opportunities that are available to those children in already difficult circumstances would be made substantially more difficult. Among those paralysed, five per cent to 10 per cent may die when their breathing muscles become immobilised. The incidence of polio, despite these rather troubling features of the disease, has decreased by over 99 per cent since 1988. It has gone from an estimated 350,000 cases worldwide at that time to just over 1,600 reported cases in 2009. That reduction really is a direct result of the global effort to eradicate the disease and the vigilance of so many people who have campaigned steadfastly in relation to it. I commend successive Australian governments for their roles in that global effort.

We know that at the 41st World Health Assembly in 1988, which then consisted of delegates from around 160 member states, a resolution was adopted for the worldwide eradication of polio. It marked at that time the launch of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, which was spearheaded by the World Health Organisation, Rotary International, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and UNICEF. As a result, in 1994 the WHO was able to declare that the 36 countries that make up the region of the Americas were polio-free. In 2000 the western Pacific region of 37 countries was also declared free from the polio virus and the European region of 51 countries received polio-free status in June 2002. In 2009 more than 361 million children were immunised against the disease.

In 2010 only four countries in the world remained polio-endemic, down from more than 125 in 1988, demonstrating the success of vigilant campaigning on such a significant health issue. Those remaining countries are Afghanistan, India, Nigeria and Pakistan. Interestingly, three of those countries are Commonwealth nations. We know that persistent pockets of polio transmission remain in northern India, northern Nigeria and the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, which are the current focus of polio eradication initiatives. In addition to this polio has re-established itself in four other countries: Angola, Chad, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and, it is suspected, in Sudan. A number of other countries we know experienced outbreaks in 2010 as a result of the virus being imported into those countries. As long as a single child remains infected, children in all countries are at risk of contracting polio. I recognise that the overall success of eradicating polio worldwide hinges on closing a substantial funding gap to finance the next steps of the global eradication initiative. I am very pleased that Australia has committed to investing an additional $140 million from 2011 to 2013 to support the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation. GAVI is an innovative public-private international fund that increases access to vaccines and immunisation against preventable diseases in some of the world's poorest countries. One of these preventable diseases is polio. I also know that the Global Poverty Project is running a grassroots campaign under the banner of 'The end of polio' and has initiated a petition in support of global polio eradication efforts. I met with them recently to discuss that.

I am very pleased to have people within my own community with an interest in this issue. Indeed, at a local community forum I held recently in my electorate volunteers from the Global Poverty Project gave a particularly pertinent presentation on how to become more active in the types of campaigns that they run on issues such as this. I am pleased to be able support their work in that way. I also know that Rotary, including Rotary groups within my own electorate, have taken a keen interest in poverty alleviation and improving the circumstances of those in developing nations, and I lend my support to their cause. (Time expired)

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Polio is historically a devastating disease, one of the most dreaded childhood illnesses in human history. Highly contagious, polio caused widespread paralysis and death in Europe and the United States of America during the 19th and 20th centuries. Affecting the central nervous system, polio can cause deformities, muscle weaknesses and flaccid paralysis. It is as debilitating as it was endemic throughout the early decades of the 1900s, causing the great race to find a vaccine.

Many of the medical initiatives that we take for granted in the Western world today were implemented out of necessity for fighting the seriousness of polio epidemics. Intensive care units had their origins in fighting polio. Before the 1950s, hospitals had little capacity for respiratory assistance for patients and the first respiratory centre opened to treat severe cases of polio, leading to the first intensive care unit opening in Copenhagen in 1953. As we all know today, intensive care units are integral parts of our hospital systems, saving countless lives every year. Further, the roots of medical philanthropy began during the polio epidemics. Grassroots fundraising was hardly heard of before these outbreaks of polio. Rehabilitation programs were introduced to help survivors and polio survivor support groups have been instrumental in advocating for disability rights. Clearly, it is a disease which has changed not only the lives of those affected and their families but also our entire Western culture.

A vaccine was developed in the 1950s and has reduced polio cases in the Western world from hundreds of thousands every year to just handfuls. Given that in 1952, 58,000 cases of polio were reported in the United States alone, this vaccine was a serious and welcome breakthrough. In 1988, this vaccine was instrumental in the global campaign to eradicate polio led by the World Health Organisation, UNICEF and Rotary International. These organisations, collaborating with governments and local communities around the world, have seen this campaign help reduce polio cases from 350,000 reported in 1988 to just 1,349 in 2010. Additionally, polio endemic countries have been reduced from 125 to just four. These figures mean that polio has been reduced by 99 per cent since 1988. It is now a disease of which young people in Western nations are almost unaware.

These changes would not have happened if Rotary International and its partners in the Global Polio Eradication Initiative had not taken up the cause. They have worked relentlessly for the past 23 years to fight polio and, as the figures previously mentioned indicate, they are getting very close to achieving their goal. Rotary International's 1.2 million volunteers took up the charge in 1985, spearheading the immunisation effort against polio before it became a coordinated campaign in 1988. They understood that this global disease would need a global effort if it was to be defeated. With over 33,000 clubs spread across 200 countries, Rotarians are well placed to engage with local governments and communities to ensure that polio eradication is at the top of everyone's agenda. Financially Rotary itself has contributed over $900 million to the polio eradication effort as well as their members volunteering their own time and resources to reach over two billion children with the oral polio vaccine. Rotary's dedication to this cause has been unwavering, with the organisation currently aiming to match the $355 million donation made by Bill and Melinda Gates towards the eradication of polio. This challenge is critical as the Global Polio Eradication Initiative has a funding gap of just over half a billion dollars. Yes, they are only half a billion dollars away from eradicating that last one per cent of polio cases—miniscule compared to the money wasted by NBN Co. on the NBN.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Very accurate though. As Rotary says, 'that final one per cent are the most difficult and expensive to prevent. Challenges include geographic isolation, worker fatigue, armed conflict, and cultural barriers,' making this job that much harder. However, as this motion highlights, we have an opportunity to ensure that polio eradication in other parts of the world is not forgotten, as has been possible for young people in Australia.

I support the call for polio eradication to be put forward on the CHOGM agenda. CHOGM brings together over 50 heads of government, including leaders from three of the four remaining countries which continue to suffer from polio. With Rotary's efforts raising over $8 billion in commitments from governments towards polio eradication since 1995 alone, CHOGM provides a perfect opportunity to find that last $500 million to save that last one per cent. As Rotary International puts it so well:

As long as polio threatens even one child anywhere in the world, all children—wherever they live—remain at risk.

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made and order of the day at the next sitting.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this motion which concerns early childhood education. I am the mover of this particular motion. This is an important motion that I hope will get the full support of this parliament. It is so important because it concerns the viability of three-year-old kindergartens in Victoria. In short, if we do not get the flexibility that is called for in this motion, then many three-year-old kindergartens in Victoria will close.

I would like to explain the origins of this pending crisis, how it is manifesting itself and the actions that we are proposing the government take to address the crisis. The crisis in three-year-old kinders and also four-year-old kinders in rural areas had its origins a few years ago when the federal Labor government decided that it wanted to get involved in preschool education. It introduced what is called the Universal Access policy, which mandated that by 2013 every child in the year before they started school, which is typically four-year-olds, must have 15 hours per week of preschool education and, further, that this preschool education must be delivered by university trained teachers. The government at the time made a commitment of $955 million over five years to assist with the implementation of this policy.

With the policy articulated, agreements were then struck with various state and territory governments to administer the universal access policy. However, while the sentiments expressed in the policy were reasonable ones—that is, to deliver good preschool education to preschoolers—the actual policy itself has not been properly thought through. Unfortunately, like many of this government's policies, the full consequences of the implementation were not properly considered before the final decision was made. In this instance, the Universal Access policy for four-year-olds is going to have a drastic impact on three-year-old kinder programs, particularly those in Victoria. In Victoria, we have the largest three-year-old kinder program: about 25 per cent of all three-year-olds attend three-year-old kinder. It is the most comprehensive program in Australia. These three-year-old kinders receive no government funding. They are often managed by parent controlled committees and they provide good introductory education for three-year-olds for about five hours per week for about 40 weeks a year. These three-year-old kinders typically use the same facilities and often the same staff as the four-year-old kinder programs.

This is where the problems arise. With the implementation of the Universal Access policy, hours for four-year-old kinders will be increased by about 50 per cent. Typically at the moment they offer about 10 to 11 hours per week for four-year-olds. So the consequences of increasing the four-year-old kinder program by 50 per cent is that it will squeeze out the three-year-old kinder programs to the extent that many of them will not survive unless something changes.

Four problems arise from the Universal Access policy in this regard. Firstly, simply a lack of space because, as I mentioned beforehand, the three-year-old programs are often run at the same location as the four-year-old programs. They have managed to combine themselves in a sequential manner offered in the same facilities. Now, if you increase by 50 per cent the four-year-old programs, then there are simply not enough hours in the day during a school hour time frame to then run a number of three-year-old programs concurrently at the same location.

The second problem is insufficient staff. There is already a shortage of university qualified staff for preschools, as you may already know, and with the four-year-old programs needing 50 per cent more staff by 2013, again three-year-old programs are going to find it very difficult to find staff to manage their programs.

Thirdly, the structure of 15 hours for four-year-olds will not necessarily fit neatly within the employment awards presently for kindergarten teachers, because under the Early Childhood Teachers and Assistants Award, a full-time person will not be able to run two sessions of four-year-old kinders. This is because the award specifies that they must have 30 minutes of non-teaching for every one hour of teaching and it also specifies a maximum of 38 hours per week. You can see, if you do the mathematics there, a single person will not be able to run two 15-hour sessions under the existing award. So again, we are going create all sorts of staffing problems in the four-year-old programs as well as the three-year-old programs due to this.

Finally, the fourth problem which arises from the Universal Access policy is that some four-year-old programs may be put in jeopardy in rural areas. That is simply because many kindergarten teachers will frequently run a program in one small kinder in one location and another one in another location and they simply will not be able to do both if the hours are increased, and so that puts some four-year-old programs also at risk and I imagine that Dan Tehan, the member for Wannon, will have something to say about that as the seconder of this motion.

Kindergartens in my community have said that they will have to close their three-year-old programs if something does not happen to rectify these problems. Templeton Orchards three-year-old preschool in Wantirna in my electorate is one such example. Lelania Currie, the vice-president of the kinder, has said publicly that they will have to close if this goes ahead by 2013. They presently cater for about 23 families each year. Other kinders have said similar things. They have said that if there is no flexibility then three-year-old kinders will simply have to shut their doors. The Municipal Association of Victoria has said that there will be a crisis by 2013 under this policy. They have pointed out that four-year-old programs are already bursting at the seams due to a mini baby boom which is going on across Victoria, and indeed across Australia, and that this Universal Access policy will exacerbate it. The Prime Minister herself has been advised that her electorate is one of the most at-risk regions for children to miss out. This will turn into a very significant crisis by 2013 and impact thousands of young families if this mess is not fixed up. The clock is ticking. We need to act and we need to act quickly.

Let me move on to what should be done to fix this. The first point I would make is that it is not too late. The policy under the current law is that it needs to be implemented by 2013. Kinders are starting to enrol already for that year and there is still some time, but we do not have a lot of time. The second point I would make is that the key principle required is flexibility. This government has a tendency to want to mandate things from the top down and, in this instance, they have come down and mandated very heavily that every single four-year-old kinder program across the country must have 15 hours. What we are suggesting, through this motion, is that the government just allows some flexibility for the kindergartens to implement their policy at their own pace and according to their own infrastructure capacity and according to their own staffing that they have available. So point 8 in the motion, which is the key point, calls on the government to provide flexibility for the kindergarten operators to deliver kindergarten services according to the needs of their own communities and in line with local infrastructure and staffing capacity and further, at the very least, provide flexibility on the start date for the implementation of the Universal Access policy. It is a reasonably straightforward motion. It should be a reasonably straightforward thing for Minister Garrett to hopefully accept.

Minister Garrett has considered this in the past and he has said no to date. He has said it is all up to the state governments. Well, can I just put on the record here that it is not just up to the state governments in this instance because there is a COAG contractual arrangement here. The Victorian state government is willing to examine it and look at providing flexibility, but we need Minister Garrett and the Gillard government to come to the table to address this problem also.

If flexibility is indeed provided and we can properly look at how we are going to implement this going forward, we also would be able to look at other things as well. There is a strong group called the Community Choice for Preschools Group which is calling for the 15 hours of funding to be spread across the two years and possibly five hours for three-year-olds and 10 hours for four-year-olds. Again, I think that is a worthy idea that should be considered, but can only be done if Minister Garrett is prepared to accept our motion to look at providing flexibilities for kinders so that they can implement things according to their own wishes.

I commend the motion to the House and I hope that it will receive support across the chamber.

Mike Symon (Deakin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak against this motion moved by the Member for Aston. In 2008 the federal Labor government made a historic commitment to this nation's early childhood sector, and that is a sector that in the past has not received funding from a federal government. In a national agreement signed between the federal government and every state and territory government, the universal access obligation for the provision of preschool or kindergarten programs was expanded—a great thing. This increased the universal access obligation from 10 hours per week to 15 hours per week for 40 weeks of kindergarten or preschool education in the year before school, and that is for every child in Australia. This program continues on as an ambitious and important reform that will increase investment in our children and it is a program that grows by the year with more money each year going from the federal government to the states to do the work that is needed.

Research from around the world shows that quality early childhood education benefits all children and that children from disadvantaged backgrounds gain particular benefit if they attend kindergarten. Research also shows that benefits include improved cognitive functioning and social skills and thereby improved school readiness. Longitudinal studies have demonstrated positive effects on school completion, further education participation, employment outcomes, earnings and general social wellbeing. That is why the federal Labor government acted to expand the amount of kindergarten education a child will receive. A recent government report of 2011 suggests that around 30 per cent of all Australian children are missing out on early childhood education in the year before schooling and, although Victoria has a much higher percentage, I know the difference between the states is particularly marked. Queensland has a far, far lower participation rate than Victoria. I believe it is somewhere around about that low 30 per cent and it has got a long way to go. Victoria historically has had a very high participation rate in four-year-old kinder or equivalent and that is a good thing, and I certainly hope that continues but obviously for a larger amount of hours each week. Boosting the federal government's investment in the early years of learning is crucial to Australia's long-term economic, social and physical health for the reasons I just previously went through.

This is a long term and challenging reform. More kindergarten teachers will have to be trained and recruited and more money will also need to be expended to expand the buildings and cater for more children at kinder for longer periods of time. When the federal Labor government made this commitment, it was clear that delivering on this would demand significant investment and a suitably long lead time to assist providers to implement the additional hours of teaching. All up, the federal government is delivering over $900 million over five years to all the states and territories through to 2012-13 to implement the universal access commitment. As I said, this is the first time the federal government has substantially funded early childhood education, and that is a great result. The share of this national funding going to Victorian kindergartens and preschools over the full five years is $210,626,000. That is a great investment from when previously there was almost nothing.

I understand that Victoria has already received about $71 million of this funding with a further $29½ million due in early December. I took the liberty of going through the original COAG agreement to find the payment schedule and to see when the money does come across. I find it interesting that even though the Commonwealth has put more money in, the state government has stood back or has been able to point the finger elsewhere and say, 'But it is not us. We need more and even though we have money and it is coming in, it is not enough.'

Although Victoria does have a particularly good program of three-year-old kinders, in many cases they have always operated as an adjunct to four-year-old kinders and, I would say, with money from the Commonwealth and investment from the state there should be enough to go around. It does not seem to be the case at the moment. I find that quite frustrating because I do not know where this federal funding is going to in Victoria. I cannot go out into my electorate and see where it is going as there is no badging, no signage, no acknowledgment of any federal money anywhere with kindergarten programs, whether they be for three- or four- or any years old. That is a particular issue when it comes to accountability of the state in spending federal money. It is something that every member in this place should also be well aware of. If we do the hard work here and collect money, pass bills and then expend money, if that is passed over to the states then we should know what we are getting for our dollars. The general public should have a right to know and demand that information.

The previous state Labor government announced and allocated $4.6 million for use in expanding some kindergartens across the state. It is expected that all these capital works will be completed by 2012. But as part of its commitment to support the expansion of universal access, the previous Victorian government—a Labor government—increased funding to the sector. Indeed, in 2010 the state Labor government at the time committed to spend more than $82.6 million over the next five years to support the expansion of places, $63 million of which would have been spent boosting state government funded kindergarten places from 62,500 to 66,090. I am sure that more are needed but it is always good to start on a problem rather than wait until it is overwhelming.

Emma King, the CEO of Kindergarten Parents Victoria applauded the previous Labor government's investment in the early years education. She said:

This comprehensive package will help ensure that all Victorian children have access to a quality kindergarten program in the year before school.

And then, after all this investment by Labor state and federal governments, what does the Victorian Liberal state government do? In the first budget of the Baillieu Liberal government there were substantial cuts, not directly to core funding but to programs around core funding to kindergartens and pre-schools, ending the free internet service provided to the state's 1,800 community-run kindergartens. The state government IT support for these community kindergartens is important and includes internet connectivity, help desk and remote technology assistance.

There were also cuts to occasional childcare services out of 220 neighbourhood houses across the state. That leaves a gap in the provision of other childhood services in Victoria. Other cuts were made to the Young Readers program, which distributed free books to children on their second birthday and also cut the books-for-babies services. The $2.1 million program distributed 70,000 books and a further 70,000 reading-to-baby manuals over four years. The loss of the Young Readers Program dismayed picture book author Jeanette Rowe, who was the program's ambassador last year. She said:

It invited mothers to start with their children at a very early age to create that habit of reading.

The literacy sessions run by maternal and child health nurses 'weren't just about reading' said Lisa Fitzpatrick, the state secretary of the Australian Nurses Federation. She said:

It was an opportunity to assess a child's vision and their hearing. It wasn't just handing out a book.

It should be underlined that, in a period when it has been estimated by the Municipal of Association of Victoria that Victoria will need an additional 400 kindergarten teachers, the state government ended its funding of retraining for early childhood workers required to upgrade their qualifications. I find it disappointing that the Liberal Party have not taken full advantage in expanding the number of hours in kindergarten education for Victorian preschoolers. It is estimated by research that every dollar spent on early childhood education gives the community a gain of $3 in return. Australia has been one of the lowest spenders on early-years education, and this reform is turning that around, with federal funding.

The original timetable for implementation included an extended five-year period, agreed to by the federal government and all the states and territories at COAG. The federal government, after discussions with state and territory governments, agreed to fund additional training of kindergarten teachers and the early-childhood workforce, with $126 million over four years, to train and retrain the professional early-childhood education and care workforce.

What this really comes down to is: where is the Commonwealth's money? Where is our investment? Fifty-nine million dollars went this year to Victoria, and yet what we hear from the member for Aston is, 'Oh, but there's no money for places.' Well, I say that there is money for places, and I say there is more money coming from the Commonwealth next year. But I say to everyone in this House that we, the members of parliament, should know where this federal money is going. I think it is only right and proper. And as long as there are groups out there calling for more, it is always worth remembering what we do with what we already have.

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The blame game is back. It is back bigger and better than ever. We were going to see an end to the blame game in 2007. We were going to have the states and the Commonwealth cooperating together. Now we have an issue—an issue of bungling and mismanagement. And what is the response of the government? 'We are going to blame the states. We're back to the blame game. We'll throw financial figures around: $900 million we're giving to this, $210 million we're giving to that, to try and put a huge smokescreen up, to get around the issue.' Yet it is a very simple and commonsense issue. It is an issue on which the government, if it could take a step back, could say, 'We can stop three-year-old kindergarten programs and four-year-old kindergartens closing in country areas.'

Let us hear from a couple of the practitioners. I am going to quote the North Hamilton Kindergarten director, Chris Wildgoose, who said that the 15 hours could result in reduced hours for three-year-old sessions. I will quote her directly, from the Hamilton Spectator of 26 May:

"I think it's a good thing for children to have that much kindergarten but it's just a challenge to fit it into the timetable with the three year-old groups and the playgroup as well," she said.

"Our committee hasn't really made a decision about how the timetable will look. It's possible our three year-old sessions will be cut back to two hours."

Ms Wildgoose said that currently parents had the option of extra kindergarten hours for their four year-olds.

"The Government has mandated that this year children do 10 and three quarter hours, so that's the basic level," she said.

"We've got another session on top of that, so parents can choose if they want to do the extra hours."

Ms Wildgoose said they had the option of introducing the 15-hour weeks next year but were still unsure if that would go ahead.

What Ms Wildgoose would like is the ability to say, 'Maybe we will have the flexibility to bring this in over three, four or five years, so that it can suit the needs of the individual kindergarten.'

I would now like to quote Sarah Millear, quoted in the Ararat Advertiser of 26 November 2010. The Willaura kindergarten wrote to the government on this issue, so they have had plenty of warning. What did she have to say? She said that the government's universal access to childcare reforms would seriously strain the over-stretched community.

"The further increase in 2013 will leave us with an insurmountable fundraising requirement, forcing us to seriously consider closing the centre unless government funding is made available.

"If the Willaura Kindergarten is forced to close, there would inevitably be a drop in enrolments for the local primary school. The community playgroup and maternal and child healthcare centre, which rely on the support of the kindergarten community, would have to look [at] their long-term viability as well. Three key services could be lost and the long-term future of the school put at risk."

That is what this motion is about. We are going to see three-year-old kindergarten programs close, we are going to see four-year-old kindergarten providers in country areas potentially close. All we need to see is a tiny bit of flexibility from the government. As the motion clearly states, what I and the member for Aston are calling on is for the government to provide flexibility for kindergarten operators to deliver kindergarten services according to the needs of their own communities and in line with local infrastructure and staffing capacity, or at the very least provide flexibility on the start date for the implementation of universal access.

We all agree with the concept that we should move to 15 hours universal access. What we do not agree on is how we should go about it. Should we mandate from Canberra that you have to do a compulsory 15 hours by 2013? When individual circumstances are not suited by mandating 15 hours, why can't you say, 'All right, in your particular circumstances you can keep it at 10 or 11 hours.' If you are the Willaura kindergarten and you are forced to close, there would inevitable be a drop in enrolments to the local primary school, the community playgroup, and the maternal and child healthcare centre, which rely on the support of the kindergarten community, would have to look at their long-term viability as well. Three key services could be lost and the long-term future of the school put at risk. That is quite clear. Given that, why would you not allow them to say, 'Yes, look, you aspire for 15, but your circumstances at the moment mean that if you have to mandate it and you have to introduce it by 2013, you are going to lose in that community all those services.' Why would you not say, 'Leave it at 10. Then when you can afford it, then more to 15.' Why do we have to mandate from Canberra, which is going to cause this hardship for the township of Willaura? The same thing is going to happen in my electorate, in the township of Cavendish. Dunkeld potentially can be left without a kindergarten teacher, all because this government has to mandate, has to be prescriptive and will not let an individual circumstance dictate how a kindergarten should run.

We have heard from the member for Aston the impact it is going to have on three-year-old programs in urban areas. Devastating. In country areas it is going to have a broad impact on whole communities. Kindergartens closing. Schools, in the future, closing. And all the services that go with it, especially your maternal primary healthcare, being threatened. All because you will not provide a tiny bit of flexibility. You want to mandate from Canberra, from here, without having thought of what the consequences on the ground would be. I see the member for Corangamite here. I am sure there are kindergartens in his community which will be suffering as a result of this.

The government needs to stop. They have been warned. They were written to by the Willaura kindergarten in 2010 raising this issue. So they knew about it. So why has the minister not acted? What we have put here, in this motion, is a very sensible, positive approach to fixing this problem. It is not a problem that is saying the government has got it completely wrong. We are saying, 'Yes, aspire to 15 hours, but do it in a way where kindergartens can adapt to it in their own individual circumstances.' Here is a positive response to an issue that needs to be fixed, needs to be addressed. The government continues to harp about negativity. Here is a positive response to a problem which they have created because they have not thought through the issue. Why not look at it? Look at it. Read what we are calling on. Provide flexibility. It is not too difficult. Instead of saying, 'We know best—this is how it will be. Canberra on high: this is how you should act,' why not say: 'Generally this is what we would like, but when your individual circumstances are different then, sure, you can have some flexibility. If you want to do 11 hours of teaching next year and then move to 12 and then to 13 and by 2018 get to 15 hours, we are fine by that'? We would prefer that to communities having the guts ripped out of them, which is what this motion has the potential to do.

I call on the government. I call on the minister. I have written to the minister on this issue. The Willaura kindergarten has written to him. The Dunkeld and Cavendish kindergartens have written to him. They have all stated their case. It is not necessary to change the whole policy. Just show flexibility—a tiny bit of flexibility—in how you are going about doing it. That will save kindergartens, it will save three-year-old programs and it will potentially save communities. I call on all members of the government to have a look at this motion. It is a good motion; it is a common-sense motion. An urban representative and a country representative are saying: this is going to cause problems. Fix the mess. (Time expired)

Laura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have to say at the outset that I am going to have to do something slightly controversial. It really does pain me to do it but I am going to have to do it, and that is to say congratulations to members of the coalition from Victoria. You won the last election in Victoria. I think it is important to remind them of that because so regularly these days they forget; they forget that they are out of opposition in Victoria. They forget that they actually have their hands on the purse strings now. They forget that they can take out the chequebook and make financial commitments to things that they profess so heartily to be committed to. I congratulate them most heartily on having that level of responsibility.

I might have expected coalition members to put up a motion like this when they were in opposition in the state of Victoria, when they did not have their hands on the state coffers, when they did not have responsibility for the policy direction of the state government. I could understand that. Have a crack at the federal and state governments. Have a crack at them with no responsibility for implementing your own agenda. But the circumstances have changed, as much as it seems to have passed by Victorian members of the coalition and their state counterparts. What I cannot understand is why coalition MPs from Victoria would choose to raise these concerns when their own Victorian coalition government has the means to commit funding to the kindergartens which they profess to be concerned about.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Laura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If those members opposite who are interjecting would allow me to continue with my words, I will address their concerns in due course. The facts are that all state and territory governments, not just the federal government, agreed through COAG to provide access to kindergarten for all children by 2013. For the first time, as my colleague from Deakin mentioned earlier on, the Australian government is funding early childhood education. The federal government has committed over $955 million over five years to support the states and territories to enable them to achieve the goals which they have each committed to. Apparently these are mere details for those opposite, who choose not to take an interest in the substantial funding commitment which their government failed to put in place. The federal government has committed $955 million to achieve the goals which all the states and territories committed to under the National Partnership Agreement on Early Childhood Education. So far as flexibility is concerned, the manner in which the Victorian government meets the universal access commitment it signed up to is entirely up to it. That is the nature of the national partnership agreement. The Victorian government is responsible for implementing universal access, supported by the very significant financial contribution of the Commonwealth government. Indeed, the Victorian education department's own website reflects this. Under the heading 'Early Childhood Education National Partnership' and the subheading 'Funding' it notes:

The Australian Government has committed $970 million nationally over five years for this reform, including $210.6 million for Victoria. The Department is responsible for leading implementation of universal access to 15 hours of kindergarten.

Unequivocally, the Victorian education department has recognised quite publicly the responsibility of the Victorian coalition government for leading implementation. If our coalition colleagues here do not consider their own state colleagues to be up to that task then they are also admitting that the coalition simply is not up for governing the state of Victoria—a matter which so many of us are very happy to conclude—

Mr Danby interjecting—

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind the member that there are appropriate ways to interject if he wishes. The member for La Trobe has the call!

Laura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, member for Melbourne Ports. This is hot on the heels of the Victorian government's handling of Take a Break services funding. We all recall what happened there and the protests about that. Despite the Commonwealth government—

Honourable members interjecting—

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

All members, including the member for Melbourne Ports—

Honourable members interjecting—

Gentlemen, stop interjecting and give the chair the opportunity to draw the House to a little bit of decorum. The member for La Trobe has the call.

Laura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As I was remarking, this is hot on the heels of the Victorian government's handling of Take a Break services funding. Despite the Commonwealth government providing record funding for early education and care, the Victorian government tried to say that the decision to de-fund Take a Break services was out of its control.

The facts are: the Brumby government had funded Take a Break services for several years, the federal government had provided record funding for early childhood education and care and the decision to de-fund Take a Break services was a unilateral decision of the Victorian government, based on its priorities and it policy dictates. But the opposition would have anyone who will listen believe that its hands are tied. We are seeing the same kind of sham here. The Victorian government says one thing on its department website—it knows what its responsibilities are under the national partnership agreement—yet it sends in federal coalition MPs to pretend it has no say in the way that services—

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I seek to intervene.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the member for La Trobe willing to give way?

Laura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No. As I was saying, two federal coalition MPs are sent in here to pretend that the Victorian government has in fact no say in the way that services under the national partnership agreement are administered in Victoria. I have no doubt that that is the case they are each putting in their respective electorates. It is unfortunate that they do not have sufficient confidence in their own Victorian colleagues to approach them with the same level of earnestness with which they come to this place—

Opposition members interjecting—

There we are. That is an interesting admission. Not only are they coming to this place raising concerns but they also seem to have limited faith in their own coalition colleagues at the state level. On so many issues it seems that the Victorian government still thinks it is in opposition. The people are certainly starting to see through its attempts to deflect responsibility.

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order on relevance. The member has not discussed flexibility once.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sorry. There is no point of order. The member for La Trobe has the call.

Laura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is interesting to see that the attempts to shut me down and keep me from speaking are being pursued at any opportunity.

On issues around the implementation of universal access, we know that Victoria already achieves the universal access target of 95 per cent of enrolments and, overall, Victoria is one of the jurisdictions closest to achieving the main goals of the national partnership agreement, no doubt due to the current government's predecessor's efforts. According to the state government's annual report, under the National Partnership Agreement on Early Childhood Education in 2009 the average weekly hours provided by standalone kindergartens in Victoria was 11.8 hours and, when provision in long day care is included, that figure is 14.6 hours.

As with other state and territory governments, Victoria remains responsible for ensuring the delivery of kindergarten programs, including its approach to achieving universal access by 2013. In agreeing to the universal access commitment, the impact on other programs, including kindergarten for three-year-olds, was considered. Indeed, it was noted in the bilateral agreement with the Victorian government. That is one of the reasons why a five-year lead time for implementation was allowed, so that kindergarten providers have time to adjust their services so that they can deliver on the universal access commitment. As the state government is responsible for ensuring the provision of kindergarten services, it is open to the Victorian government to make greater funding contributions to kindergarten services for three-year-olds if it so wishes. I would suggest again that members make their remarks to their Victorian state colleagues.

We know that Victoria already meets the 95 per cent enrolment benchmark for four-year-olds, it provides 10 hours free through state subsidy and it has a robust system of delivery through local government, placing it well ahead of many other jurisdictions in terms of reaching the goals of universal access commitment. The federal government has provided a significant amount of funding. It has kick-started this initiative and it really is up to my Victorian coalition colleagues to stop bleating about that kind of commitment and start working with their Victorian colleagues. (Time expired)

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before the member for Gippsland gets the call, I just remind the House that we should contain our enthusiasm a little bit for the debate. I am sure the member for Gippsland would like to be heard.

Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Roads and Regional Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a very important motion and I do commend the member for Aston and also the member for Wannon for putting forward what I believe is a very common-sense proposal. I do acknowledge from the outset that these are very reasonable members of parliament. They have come here in good faith trying to solve a problem in their community and what concerns me is those opposite automatically go straight to the barricades. This is so typical of this government: they go straight to the barricades and take a partisan position. This is a very reasonable motion which seeks to provide flexibility and some common-sense solutions to what is an impending disaster for this government.

This government was warned in the early days in relation to home insulation, it was warned in the early days in relation to the Building the Education Revolution scheme, it was warned in the early days of the green loan assessment scheme—and we all know what happened to each and every one of those programs. They were monumental disasters on the ground. Now we have two very reasonable members of parliament—one from a metropolitan area and one from a regional area—coming into this place and sounding the warning bells. I hope the minister is listening more closely than those opposite right now. This is an issue which has the potential to be disastrous on the ground in many communities, particularly when we are talking about young people and their futures in our communities right across regional areas—which I am more interested in, I must admit—and also the metropolitan areas that the member for Aston referred to. There are major problems brewing across Victoria in relation to this universal access issue and the effort to try to provide 15 hours by 2013. I said at the outset that that is the bad news. There is a crisis brewing. It has the potential to be an enormous mess, but the good news is there is still time to try to fix this.

Those opposite can block their ears and go straight to the barricades like we heard today. The leader of business on the government side in the chamber referred to the protesters out the front today as being the 'convoy of no consequence'. They can go down that path where they just put their fingers in their ears and ignore the concerns of everyday Australians or they can actually listen to the concerns being put forward by Australians. The benefits of early childhood education programs are well understood I believe by members on both sides of the House. I do not think there is any question about that at all. I think everyone understands the importance of early childhood education programs. I do believe the 15-hours-per-week issue is well intended. I do believe that the government was heading down the path of trying to provide good early childhood education right across Australia. I give the government credit for its good intentions. But, like so many of the Rudd government's and the Gillard government's good intentions, the delivery is a cause for concern.

Mr Champion interjecting—

It is interesting that the member for Wakefield intervenes. The member for Wakefield often interjects. He interjects when I make 90 second statements in the House, but he never actually shows the spine to stand up for his community. He never actually stands up on issues like the carbon tax or on this issue, where there is genuine concern in communities across Australia. He never stands up and says to the government, 'We have got a problem, Minister.' Those opposite can interject as much as they like when I am making a speech, but do they stand up to their own ministers and say, 'Minister, we have a problem'? You have not got the guts to do that in the House on issues like the carbon tax or on the issue of early childhood education.

The member for Aston made some very important points and I hope the minister has a good look at the Hansard. He talked about flexibility being critical and I think that is an aspect that our national government needs to understand more. The one-size-fits-all model driven by this government has been a disaster on many occasions across several programs. There are several programs—I referred to a couple earlier—where a national agenda fell flat on the ground right across Australia because we went for a one-size-fits-all model. I fear that this program is heading down the same path. On those points I congratulate the member for Aston for his contribution and for the motion he brought to the House. I also congratulate the member for Wannon for his contribution. He raised very reasonable concerns on behalf of this community.

I noticed that the member for La Trobe referred to another aspect of early childhood education—the Take a Break occasional care program. Let us get this right: to save a miserable $12.6 million over four years this Labor government has withdrawn support for an occasional care program across regional areas which provides a vital service in each of our electorates, but it can still find $12 million for a carbon tax TV advertising campaign. So it cannot fund occasional child care in regional communities but it can fund propaganda campaigns on the carbon tax. If those opposite want to have a reasonable debate on issues of great significance to the Australian people, start treating members on this side with respect when they raise reasonable and legitimate issues. (Time expired)

Darren Cheeseman (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think it is really important in debates like this that we actually put some facts on the table. The last Brumby government had in their forward estimates $109 million for the provision of kindergartens. That is what the last Brumby budget said. Guess what the first Baillieu government budget said with respect to kindergartens? It said $9 million. The Baillieu government in their first budget cut $100 million out of the kindergarten budget in Victoria. That is so that they could get around to funding their uncosted election commitments.

This government is very proud—

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I seek to intervene.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the member for Corangamite willing to give way?

Darren Cheeseman (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I am not. The Gillard government is very proud and very pleased to have entered into a COAG agreement with all of the states and territories to lift the provision of kindergarten for four-year-olds. That is an important initiative. It is an initiative that will give all Australian kids the best opportunity to access schooling in the following year. The universal agreement was entered into with all of the states and territories and it led to a very substantial amount of money flowing to those states and territories to deliver 15 hours of kindergarten for four-year-olds. That is something that I am very pleased about. I actually, just this last week gone, read in the local newspaper that Minister Wendy Lovell, the state Minister for Children and Early Childhood, was at the Inverleigh Kindergarten within my electorate. I read with some interest that she was opening a new kindergarten room within that facility to provide for the Inverleigh community. I thought I might do a bit of a Google search to see where that money had come from and—surprise, surprise!—I found a press release by John Brumby, the then Premier of Victoria, announcing that under the universal access agreement with the Commonwealth they would be providing money to the Inverleigh Kindergarten to provide the infrastructure required to deliver kindergarten facilities in the area. I thought, 'Perhaps I will go back and have a look at the source document because there was no acknowledgement about where that money might come from.' So I went onto the Premier of Victoria's website and had a bit of a look and, no, there was no indication that that money actually had come from the Commonwealth government under the COAG agreement. This is the reality: time and time again I see press releases coming out by the new state minister claiming responsibility for opening new facilities and providing money for kindergartens but, time and time again, I see that there is no acknowledgment or at least very, very poor acknowledgment that it comes under the agreement entered into by the Gillard government with all states and territories.

A government member: They think they get it from the Magic Pudding.

Exactly right! I say to the Baillieu government that the—

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order that goes to relevance. He has not addressed the motion of flexibility once. Rural kindergartens will die.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. The Member for Corangamite has the floor.

Darren Cheeseman (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point I would like to make is that, time and time again, the coalition government in Victoria run around and try to blame the Commonwealth for a problem that actually does not exist. The reality is that John Brumby, when he was Premier, with the contribution that the Commonwealth was going to make, was able to deliver the reforms that we saw at COAG. The reality is that Baillieu has taken money away from it and he is now trying to blame the Commonwealth.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member's time has expired and the time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

That the motion be amended to read—That the House:

(1) notes:

(a) the positive impact compulsory and voluntary income management is having on the wellbeing of families and children in Perth and the Kimberley in Western Australia;

(b) an independent evaluation of income management in Western Australia reported that income management had made a positive impact on the lives of women and children including increasing their ability to meet essential needs and save money;

(c) that a non discriminatory model of income management system has been rolled out in the Northern Territory to help children who are being neglected or are at risk of neglect;

(d) that more than 1,700 people have moved off income management across the Northern Territory including because they have found jobs and apprenticeships or improved their parenting skills; and

(e) that income management produces positive life impacts for individuals acquiring new skills through training and getting jobs;

(2) welcomes the Government’s decision to trial income management in other communities to help those families and individuals receiving welfare payments who:

(a) are identified as vulnerable by Centrelink social workers;

(b) are referred by child protection workers; or

(c) volunteer to participate to improve their ability to manage and save money and provide the essentials of life for their children; and

(3) calls for continued evaluation and monitoring of income management in the new and existing locations with a view to assisting further expansion for the benefit of vulnerable Australians—

I move In my last speech regarding these matters I spoke a great deal about Western Australia. I do not propose to do that tonight. The member for Durack and others from Western Australia can do that. It has been a long time since I have had anything to do with Western Australia. But in the conclusion of that speech I spoke about the income management and other welfare reforms which have been undertaken by this government. I spoke about their extension to other areas around Australia, in particular into my own community and I think that these reforms are critical but only if they are matched with opportunity. Specifically, I asked for them to be put into the community of Playford. I have been not only talking about this in parliament but also lobbying government ministers because I believe that while Playford, which incorporates the old city of Elizabeth and the old city of Munno Parra, has always been a great working-class community it has always been a community that has been buffeted by changes in the Australian economy, in particular the reduction of tariffs and the demolition of unskilled jobs. So we find that while the average unemployment rate across the country is 5.1 per cent, something we can all be proud of, the average rate across Playford is 12.7 per cent. In some suburbs it is as high as 20 per cent. We know that in some of these communities up to 48.2 per cent of the working age population is in receipt of some Centrelink benefit. We know that the average duration of unemployment is 54 weeks, as against the national average of 36 weeks. We know that all of this has a devastating impact on people's employment prospects, particularly in the new economy.

It is interesting to note that in Playford we used to have a problem with jobs as there were just not enough jobs. When I came out of university I ended up, as a university graduate, being a cleaner. I ended up working in warehouses. I ended up being a trolley collector. I ended up doing casual work of all shapes and sizes—and if I were doing that work then almost certainly I would have displaced someone with less education, someone who was less able to participate in the education system and in the economy.

We know that for such a long period people just did not have the opportunity to work. Of course, unemployment is the most destructive thing that you can do to a family. It is the most destructive thing that you can do to a community. We know that out of all of that has come the terrible blight of decades of unemployment. We have had intergenerational unemployment, simply families that could not get a start even after education and desperate attempts to find employment. Even after really trying hard, they could not find work and this led to all sorts of social problems.

The destruction of the family unit in many of these communities led to problems that were symptoms of this economic and social breakdown but ended up being problems in their own right. So we know that many of these communities need both specific action as to and specific changes to our welfare system. They need the linking of income management with the social security system and the child protection system. We know we have to interlink those systems so that they effectively manage people's incomes and effectively give people the assistance that they need to stabilise their households and, from there, gain employment, education and participation in the broader community. But we also know that we have to provide not just training but the prospect of a job at the end of it.

Governments can do things and I think in this area we have done a great job in terms of income management. Some five of 10 communities around the country are getting income protection and the others of the 10 are getting special programs to intervene to help teenage mothers and the like. But we are not at the end of it. A job is the most valuable thing. A government can take action but we need to provide work. That is why it is so good to see that in my community Holden's have provided a guarantee of 20 jobs off the line to long-term unemployed people who have completed a three-month, five-day-a-week training course. This training course is designed specifically to lift people out of unemployment and into work. It is designed specifically to intervene in people's lives and give them personal presentation and literacy and numeracy skills. It is designed basically around employability. I think that is critical, along with the government's welfare reforms, to sending the message that, although we expect more of people in this new economy and we are not prepared to leave people behind anymore after two decades of economic change, we are prepared to provide opportunity. Nearly all of the money to run these employability courses, these pre-employment courses, comes from federal programs.

They need employers to engage and we have seen both Holden and Woolworths provide these opportunities, provide this work. We have seen Holden now running a second program again some 40 places in the program with 20 employment opportunities. We have also seen Woolworths at Blakes Crossing embark on the Fresh 40 Program, which is all about providing people who have been unemployed and giving them the employability skills so that they can get to work.

Welfare to work is about many things. It is about the government's changes, particularly around income management; particularly around team mothers. But it is also about embracing communities. It is about linking reform to opportunity. That is the critical part that has been missing in previous attempts. We have heard a lot about these matters over the years. We have seen many shock jocks say that if only people did a bit more or knocked on a few more doors they would get work. We have seen a lot of people frankly make excuses for those not seeking work. Neither approach is responsible. It is not responsible for community members; it is certainly not responsible for government members of MPs to advocate. Basically we need both reform which requires more of people and asks more of people in certain instances and it requires that they have stable households. It requires that they send their kids to school; it requires that they participate in the community the same way we would expect anybody to participate. It also requires the government and business and others to come up with the path to employment; to come up with a path out of the mire of intergenerational unemployment which can be so heartbreaking and so difficult and you can only feel for those people who often try. They try and they try and sometimes they get casual work and they just lift themselves out of these problems and something comes along, they lose their job and they are back on the heap.

We do not want to see that happening. We want to make sure that people are lifted out of poverty and lifted out of unemployment. We can only do that if we provide opportunity. As I said, for so long in these communities opportunity was absent. It is now the opposite. We now find that employers cannot fill vacancies; we find, in particular, employers who have skilled vacancies unable to find employment. We have to set up a system where we retrain those who are currently in employment. Retrain them to take on the work that is provided in the Defence industry; retrain them to work in the mines and in the civil construction area where there are going to be so many high paid opportunities and we will kick ourselves if we miss them. We need to retrain the unemployed—this group of people who have been left behind in previous economic growth; left behind after a decade of indifference by the coalition government, to these communities interests. We need to retrain them to take the unskilled jobs or the semi-skilled jobs that will be left behind in this great transition that we are going through. This great change in our terms of trade; this great economic bounty that will hit us which is presenting all sorts of challenges in all sorts of areas but one of them is this area and I think all of these reforms that the government has undertaken and which I personally lobbied for are the beginning of that transformation and the beginning of hope coming to these communities. I commend it to the house.'

Barry Haase (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise this evening to support this private member's motion. I believe income management, either compulsory or voluntary, has a valid place within Australian society regardless of the recipients colour or creed. This private members motion moved by a member of the government is rather refreshing. So many members of the government, because of their apparent high regard for equal opportunity, believe that the intervention by government with a program of income management somehow takes away the more important basic rights of individuals. This lofty, worldly view of human rights may be fine in debating circles however to hold a view that income management and its potential removal of basic or equal rights is more important than the lives of small innocent children, has moved me to support this motion. The motion is outlined in detail by the member for Wakefield. He highlights a number of statistical benefits as a result of income management. The negative impact of welfare does not discriminate against race as our moral responsibility to ensure all children—children of any heritage—trapped within the walls of welfare are fed, clothed, educated, safe and in a warm bed at night. These expectations must be realised for all children, not just some.

A few months ago the ABC, in cohorts with Animals Australia, put to air a carefully compiled piece to denigrate the live cattle export industry in Australia. I find it alarming that a population so ready to stop an industry in its tracks in an effort to stop the cruelty recently shown to be inflicted on animals overseas cannot show the same passion in response to the very real problem of cruelty to our children. The only explanation is that the population is unaware of the truth. That they have to be shown by the same people who pushed the button on their computer or got out of bed on a Sunday to attend a rally to influence a decision on something they know nothing about is remarkable. To choose to be sympathetic to animals and ignore our abused children, often in remote communities—children who have no voice and no button to push for help—is truly remarkable.

A government member: Surely you can do both.

Not necessarily multi-skilled. The Little children are sacred report of the Northern Territory board of inquiry into the protection of Aboriginal children from sexual abuse published in 2007 seems to have been forgotten. The board of inquiry into the protection of Aboriginal children from sexual abuse submitted an interim report to the Chief Minister in October 2006 and it said:

Sexual abuse of children is not restricted to those of Aboriginal descent … nor to just the Northern Territory. The phenomenon knows no racial, age or gender borders. It is a national and international problem.

The classic indicia of children likely to suffer neglect, abuse and/or sexual abuse are unfortunately, particularly apparent in Aboriginal communities. Family dysfunctionality, as a catch-all phrase, reflects and encompasses problems of alcohol and drug abuse, poverty, housing shortages, unemployment and the like. All of these issues exist in many Aboriginal communities.

I can stand here and espouse all manner of doctrine, but the truth of the matter is I do not have the answers to all of the problems faced by not only those in our remote Aboriginal communities but also those in the wider community who are suffering from the same—dare I say—social malaise.

I do know, however, that income management appears to be working and should be extended. It is instinctive to protect our young and we are morally bound to protect not only the young but also the feeble, the infirm, the disadvantaged. What sort of country have we become that our moral compass is so out of whack we have forgotten the horror that was made public in 2007? Women, children and the elderly are being abused on a daily basis and too many are pretending it is not happening. Income management ensures priority items such as rent, utilities, food, clothes, health items and basic household products are paid for. What it does not allow for is the spending of money on alcohol, pornography, tobacco, gambling products, gambling services, home brew kits or home brew concentrate, very specific.

The Northern Territory Centre for Disease Control provides sexually transmitted infection data for children in the Territory for 2000 to 2005. The following is from the Little children are sacred report:

The per capita rate of sexually transmitted infection amongst all Aboriginal people is between seven and thirty times greater than for non-Aboriginal people. From 2001 to 2005 of all SDIs diagnosed in Aboriginal people, 8 per cent occurred in children under the age of 16 years, compared with 3.2 per cent for non-Aboriginal children. SDIs are statistically more likely to be found in Aboriginal children. From 2001 to 2005, an STD was identified in 64 children aged under 12 years. Some 54 of these children were identified as aboriginal, five were identified as non-aboriginal and the cultural identity of another five was not reported.

Sixty-four children under the age of 12 years were identified as having sexually transmitted diseases. Regardless of racial origin, these figures are abhorrent. I very much doubt that these children were having sex of their own free will. I dare say the majority of these innocent children were from homes where alcohol and drug abuse is the norm and where welfare money was spent on getting high. If even one child is saved from both the physical pain and the ongoing mental anguish because of welfare quarantining, it is worth it. I challenge anyone to disagree with me and I dare any civil libertarian to look me in the eye and tell me I am wrong. I have seen the damage done, I have heard the stories and I am disappointed that we did not initiate income management sooner.

  Our welfare system in some cases creates long-term intergenerational dependency too often including those able to participate in work. Yes, good old-fashioned work. Work promotes self discipline and self-esteem—the Australian idiom of a fair day's work for a fair day's pay. Inability to manage money or spending in a manner that ignores the basic necessities has been a major problem in my remote communities. It is sadly a problem that for too long has been overlooked. Why, you may ask. I suggest because some bureaucrat decided that equal rights and political correctness were more important than mutual obligation. Going further than this motion, I would suggest that those communities which are supported by taxpayers but which have no chance of jobs are unsustainable. Imagine a life where each day rolls into another, one where nothing punctuates those days—no challenge, no responsibility, nothing to look forward to except the day the welfare cheque comes in. It is a life of boredom and hopelessness.

We have no right to take away a person's dignity; no right whatsoever to keep giving handouts and expect nothing in return. We must educate our people. We must move them to work. We must give back a sense of self pride. We must demand mutual obligation. Tough love is required. No matter what our colour, we instinctively know the difference between right and wrong from a very early age. Drugs and alcohol blur the ages of reality, but they do not change right from wrong.

There are civil libertarians who argue against income management, but I wonder if they have ever looked into the eyes of a child who is no longer raped by a drunk or drugged father, uncle, brother, cousin or neighbour. Have they looked into the eyes of a wife who is no longer beaten and raped by a husband fuelled by alcohol and drugs? I do not think so. If they had, they would support income management. There cannot be a one-size-fits-all approach to reform, and income management may not be the best answer to a range of insidious social conditions; but it is the best answer we have at this point in time. To ignore the plight of children locked within the walls of generational welfare is to be complicit in the horrendous outcomes of that cycle. I seriously support this motion.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is an important issue. It slips through when everyone is trying to be politically correct around the way we view and identify issues, particularly those associated with welfare. What the member for Wakefield has been able to do is to ensure that our focus is firmly and unwaveringly fixed on families and children in particular. Just to reiterate, income management is an arrangement whereby a percentage of the income will be quarantined to be available for priority goods for families, such as food, housing, clothing, education and health care.

Income management is an essential tool necessary for individuals to participate, particularly families, in the normal discourse of life and for ensuring that their families will not miss out. There are many families in Australia that sometimes struggle to stretch their budget to ensure that they are providing the necessary support for basic elements of life. Sometimes, regrettably, because of various choices, particularly bad choices, that people make there is not enough money available in the family budget to ensure that provision for their family, particularly for their children, is met in an appropriate way.

One thing that this initiative seeks to do is ensure that individuals have the necessary skills and knowledge about how to manage their finances, things that many of us take for granted. But the truth of the matter is that it does not equally apply to everybody, particularly those on a limited income through a welfare system.

When we discuss things like this, often people want to talk about the fundamentals of human rights. In fact, the member for Durack just referred to that. I often speak about human rights in the House. But, first and foremost, in any discourse on human rights must be the human rights that prevail for children. A child who is being neglected or at risk of being neglected deserves to be assisted in having a brighter future under the care and guidance of their parents, particularly those who are capable of taking care of them. Sometimes they have to learn to take care of them. It would be a great tragedy to see people lose custody of their children simply because of lack of education and information on how to manage their family finances.

I have only been in my current electorate for a little over 12 months but within my former electorate was Macquarie Fields, which is a very significant housing commission area and certainly an economically challenged area. There are many issues there. I spent a lot of time there with people such as Father Chris Riley, trying to do things, particularly post the 2005 riots. I met up with a bloke who freely admitted he was a drug addict. When we were having some discussions about his financial situation, he became very morose. He admitted to me that if there had been some greater effort to actually control his welfare he may not have lost his three children. He thought he had a system available to him where he got his payments and all the rest of it. He had good intentions of looking after his kids, sending them to school and doing all the other things that most parents do. But when he got into drugs and alcohol and things like that, a lot of that fell away. In fact, so did his parental responsibilities of ensuring his kids went to school and a few other things.

The consequence was that the New South Wales government, through DOCS, moved in and, rightfully, put the children into foster homes where they, at least, could have an opportunity for a future. This bloke asserted to me, 'If there were some system of intervention, some system that could have prevailed, other than "Give me the cheque every fortnight"—some way that I could have been held to account for what I was not doing, I might have woken up to myself.' I think that is the point that the member for Wakefield made. This is not necessarily a case of people being bad or squandering their money and doing all those other things; a lot of it is just inexperience in doing the right thing, failing to learn and failing to see the relevance of that to children. (Time expired)

Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wish to add my support tonight to the concept of income management. The reality is that right around this country, from different groups, different communities, different places, there are parents who are making decisions that are not always in the best interests of their child. Whether that is through human frailty or an intent to put their own priorities first and above that of their children, the outcomes can be the same. The children finish second, and that is a tragedy. It is something that we need to guard against.

I have said in the past that I believe there should be more times when, if a child is in danger or is in circumstances of such negativity in the home, children should be taken from their parents to protect them, to make their lives a better opportunity for them in the future. But it is the case that after times of crime or drug use or abuse of various substances, in circumstances where the parents are not making good decisions, then there is that place for income management. When the agencies have identified the families, the parents or the carers who need to be assisted then that is certainly the case and that should occur.

I welcome the fact that income management started as part of the Northern Territory intervention and continues today. I hope to see it rolled across the whole country, not only where we just say a particular area needs support and everyone in that area should be on income management, but also in those circumstances where state agencies have identified the opportunities for families to be assisted under an obligation, if nothing else. If they have identified those families then it does not matter what colour their skin is or what race or from what background they are. The important thing is that we have the will in this place to step in and do what needs to be done for the sake of the children. I certainly appreciate that there is wide bipartisan support for exactly these sorts of measures.

As part of this scenario, we know there are times when people will go out there and decide what the priorities are for their family. Sometimes it can be cigarettes, alcohol, drugs or maybe it is gambling. There are a lot of different vices in many respects that demonstrate that a person has a skewed view of the world. Those vices are the high priority and the needs of the child, whether it is good food on the table or clean clothes on the children, tend to come second. That is a tragedy and again it goes to the point that, in all the cases when families are identified as being in need of assistance such as income support, this is where it comes in.

We know that here has been success. There have been people who have embraced the obligation put upon them and have risen above the old circumstances under which they lived. But we need to be careful as well. People need to never forget that in these cases of adversity or when things are going wrong in their lives, the first thing they should do is look in the mirror and decide what part they have played. We need to be very careful in this country that we do not always look for someone who has failed or has these sorts of issues. What has society done wrong? The reality is that we need to look at ourselves first. We need to have that sense of personal responsibility before we look for others to blame. So we need to be careful that the victim culture in this country does not let people off the hook, so that they do not embrace their own weaknesses, so that they can work on improving themselves to get themselves out of trouble with the help of society.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is:

That grievances be noted.

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is with some regret that I rise to speak tonight, at a time when there are numerous consequences from global financial turmoil and equally from the effects of the poor economic and financial management of this Labor-Greens government. It is only going to get worse once we start to see the full impact of the carbon tax, which is like a cyclone bearing down on our economy, businesses and consumers, who are already beginning to feel some of the effects and are beginning to batten down the hatches. We are seeing this in reduced retail trade and poor business sentiment survey figures.

The Labor-Greens government has, over the course of the past four years, presided over waste and mismanagement on a scale never before seen in the history of this great nation, and now they wish to finish the job by introducing a carbon tax at a time of great global economic uncertainty. It is important to consider in this context the principles that allow a market economy to function effectively. These principles include protection of private property rights, freedom of contract, personal responsibility, open and fair markets, monetary flexibility and a steadiness of economic policy.

It has been well demonstrated globally that countries with a well-defined system of laws that protect private property rights have prospered, and it is concerning to note the doubt being placed in the agricultural industry due to the rights of mining companies under their mining leases. The doubt that is created in one of our nation's most important industries is a grave concern, as it flows through to other areas of the community as people begin to wonder about the security of food supplies and other agricultural products in the future.

Freedom of contract is an essential component of a well-functioning market economy and means that individuals and businesses are free to negotiate the terms and conditions of their own contracts free from government interference. A current example of the government's failure to adhere to this principle is in respect of the changes proposed under the FOFA reforms, particularly in relation to opt-in provisions. Clients of financial planners have always had the option to move to another financial planner at any time that they see fit, and there is no necessity for the government to add to an already large body of red tape and regulations swamping the financial planning industry by applying onerous opt-in provisions. If the government wish to truly improve the future outcomes for the community, they would do far better to focus on the corporate governance issues affecting the industry, as has been clearly outlined by the Cooper review, and seek to make the product manufacturers more accountable for the products that they bring to market.

Personal responsibility, as we frequently discuss, is something that over the past several decades has been increasingly on the wane. We as a nation seek to have other people solve our problems for us and, unfortunately, over the past few decades increasingly the government has been seen as a saviour for people's problems—and that is irrespective of what side of politics we are on. That devalues the notion of personal responsibility. It is time that we again value the notion of personal responsibility and be prepared to be held accountable for our actions and accept the consequences thereof. It is not good enough for people to go cap in hand to governments to solve their problems, as this ultimately leads to bigger governance with more legislation to administer, the end result being an ever greater bureaucracy and a growing loss of freedom.

Open markets are the cornerstone of our economy, and the ability to trade both internally and externally is vitally important to the future economic prospects of this country. It is important that we continue to pursue new free trade agreements and also to prosecute the argument for removal of subsidies and tariffs globally, which distort our global trade markets. Distortion of subsidies and tariffs results in an obscuring of price signals that indicate to companies what goods and services are actually required. In addition, governments who provide these subsidies are in actuality redistributing the nation's wealth to industries that would not survive without the subsidy. This does not provide the basis for sound economic policy.

One of the greatest problems we have in the world today is that of monetary and financial stability. Since 1971 we have had a global financial system which has developed into a debt based fiat money and inflationary model. This has resulted in a perceived increase in wealth, when in reality it has lead to a decrease in real wealth, increasing inequalities in wealth and income and a general loss of income for the future.

The principles that I have touched on ultimately should all lead to a steadiness of economic policy and activity. It is therefore instructional to look at the current results being generated under the guidance of the current Labor-Greens government. In the four years since Labor came to power, they have squandered a surplus of over $20 billion and succeeded in racking up a net debt of some $107 billion—and growing. These funds have been spent on a variety of projects which may in the initial concept have been sound, but the execution has left a lot to be desired—projects such as the pink batt insulation scheme, which was rorted and resulted in many homes being burned and lives being lost, and the BER school halls program, which in some areas resulted in buildings that were grossly overpriced, were not what schools wanted or were a combination of both. That program lacked consultation with schools and communities to determine what those schools and communities actually required—although that was not across the board; there were areas that were very successful. The NBN has the potential to cost far more than the allocated $36 billion, a cost far in excess of any other similar program globally and one which, despite assurances to the contrary, does not appear to be providing any cost savings in services. It is a project whose magnitude should be reviewed. A cost benefit analysis should be completed to ensure Australian taxpayers are getting value for money. We can touch on many other programs. The set-top box program and the immigration program are other examples of failures of this current Labor-Greens government.

On top of this we have the spectre of a carbon tax, which, according to my investigations at this point at least, will provide no practical on-the-ground environmental benefit. It will however provide us with some of the most expensive power in the world and significantly damage our small to medium sized businesses, which are the majority employers in this nation. That will provide a consequent flow-on to the impact on jobs. In addition, government wishes to seek to implement a mining resource rent tax, which will impact on the sole successful industry in our economy at present.

It has been ably demonstrated over many years that bigger government and higher taxes or higher fees and charges is not the solution to future economic growth. It is actually lower taxes and less regulation, a sound financial system, that provides the framework for businesses to grow and prosper and for our economy to grow and prosper for future generations. It will always be the case that capital being retained by business for future growth will be used far more effectively and thoughtfully than that dollar of capital being in the government's hands for purposes of taxation, government spending or redistribution of wealth. It is those avenues, through capital being retained in business, that will fund the future growth of our economy to prosper into the future, not through the new and higher taxes and regulation imposed by a government that appears to have little if any economic understanding, despite their protestations to the contrary.

Sharon Grierson (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Rather than the mantra of misery just delivered by the other side I rise to actually highlight what can be achieved by individual members of parliament and by a government that is absolutely committed to a prosperous and fair economy. I have risen on other occasions in this parliament to speak in support of legislation to make superannuation fairer, to defend the rights of our workers and to make our economy a more prosperous one.

Today, I rise to speak of the human consequences of a failure to comply with legislatively mandated superannuation requirements and the toll that this can have on families, and did have on the family of Robert Watson. Four years ago, I put on the record my sympathy for Robert's widow, Kathy, and his eight children and 10 grandchildren. I reiterate those condolences now. In March 2007, a partition wall at a Central Coast construction site collapsed, killing Mr Watson. At the time, Mr Watson's employer was behind on his superannuation payments, denying his family a death benefit of up to $100,000. This left Mr Watson's family in financial distress at a time when they should have been able to grieve for the loss of a husband and father without additional worries about financial matters. Thankfully for Robert Watson's family, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union stepped in and assisted with funeral and other expenses and offered counselling support for the family. I note that Mr Watson was not a member of that union, but that is the sort of action that that union takes to support individuals. I acknowledge particularly the work of former secretary Andrew Ferguson on this particular matter.

At the time, the CFMEU also negotiated an ex gratia payment of $57,000 for the family from the employer. Although it fell short of the death benefit that his family should have been paid, I do acknowledge the willingness of the employer to reach that agreement with Robert's family and the union and to go some way to righting their initial wrong. However, it should never have come to this. No worker should have to worry about whether his superannuation guarantee is being paid by his employer. The $174,000 fine imposed on the head contractor and subcontractor earlier this year by the Industrial Court of New South Wales, after a WorkCover investigation, which of course has taken quite a long time, cannot undo the financial and emotional damage that was done.

In 2007, I raised on three occasions in parliament, including twice as the chair of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit, Mr Watson's tragic case. To its credit, the Australian Taxation Office took heed of those warnings, sought extra resources and commenced a more rigourous approach towards the investigations into the nonpayment of superannuation entitlements. This investigation has since yielded some very positive results. The ATO has discovered that unpaid superannuation over the past five years has totalled $1.3 billion, with the most affected employees being in low-income, casual or part-time employment, especially in the trucking industry, which is interesting, and the auto repair and electrical services industries. This year, the ATO has already collected a total of $294 million in unpaid superannuation and penalties and it expects to investigate a further 17,000 complaints about the nonpayment of superannuation entitlements next year.

Many small businesses not only are not complying but also are unaware of their superannuation obligations, as well as other responsibilities they owe to their employees, and with approximately 50 per cent of small businesses actually failing within the first five years of their operation, workers can be left in a precarious position and significantly out of pocket. It is often workers and contractors who lose out when a company goes into liquidation and there is little left over to pay outstanding entitlements. That is why it is encouraging to see that the ATO is not simply adopting a rigourous and punitive stance but is working to ensure that employers are aware of their superannuation and taxation responsibilities through greater online information sharing and preventative initiatives. The long-term implications of employers not paying superannuation contributions for families can be destabilising. If an employer is not paying the required payments, a worker may reach retirement age and have significantly less money saved than they would have; thus necessitating that they stay in the workforce or organise alternative income. Many people, just like in the case of Robert and Kathy Watson, would not know that their employer was not paying superannuation contributions until it is too late. I would like to publicly acknowledge and thank Joanne McCarthy, a journalist of the Newcastle Heraldfor her ongoing attention to this matter over the past four years.

But today, through the Securing Super reforms introduced by this government, we hope to prevent situations such as this arising again by implementing some of the recommendations of the Cooper review of superannuation. This will require that employees receive information on their payslips about the actual amount of superannuation being paid into their account and quarterly notifications from their superannuation fund if regular payments cease. It is that sort of assurance that every employee needs. By providing employees with more timely information the risk of superannuation default et cetera is substantially reduced. The Securing Super reforms also increase the enforcement powers of the ATO and the Fair Work Ombudsman, who will be given stronger powers to ensure that businesses pay their employees superannuation entitlements by extending the director's penalty regime to cover unpaid super entitlements and improve the capacity of the ATO to police super payments. These reforms were part of the 2011-12 budget and will go a long way to protecting workers' rights to superannuation.

There is one further matter that I would like to bring to the attention of the house: Last week I updated the house on the disturbing release of hexavalent chromium over the suburb of Stockton in my electorate and the unacceptable delay by both the company responsible, Orica, a multinational firm, and the New South Wales government to notify affected residents. It is with deep regret and some anger that I advise the house of further developments. Last Friday, Orica released a quantity of highly poisonous arsenic above allowable levels into the Hunter River—and this is right in the city of Newcastle. This isn't somewhere up the river or far away; this is a kilometre from where I live, I suppose. According to details provided by Orica, 1.2 megalitres of industrial waste released into the river contained 0.067 milligrams per litre of arsenic, well above the allowable limit of 0.05 milligrams per litre. This, however, was not the end of the bad news nor was it an isolated incident it seems. According to reports in the media today, this latest incident represented the 131st time since 2000 that Orica has breached its pollution license. It is no surprise therefore that residents in Stockton and in other areas surrounding the plant, including Mayfield, Carrington, Fern Bay, Maryville, have very little confidence in the safeguards to prevent or manage such industrial accidents on their doorsteps.

Since I spoke to the House on the issue last week, I note that Premier O'Farrell, in the face of sustained political pressure, announced an inquiry into the leak of hexavalent chromium. It is abundantly clear however that the terms of reference of this inquiry do not go far enough. If the residents of Stockton are to have any confidence, the inquiry must examine why New South Wales environment Minister Parker waited almost 2½ days to notify the residents of Stockton and why she was able to advise the state member for Newcastle, Tim Owen, her colleague, of the leak almost 24 hours before either Parker or Owen advised Newcastle constituents. As the Sydney Morning Herald noted today, the inquiry will not reassure anxious voters unless it also asks hard questions of the environment minister and senior officials about the seemingly outrageous delay in informing potentially-affected residents of the chromium leak. The large Catholic school in my electorate chose to do their fun run the next morning, for the whole school, taking them to Stockton to do that. Perhaps they would not have done that if they had been informed.

The inquiry, though, if it is to have any relevance to the residents who live side by side with these industries every single day, must examine the broader impact of industrial activities on Kooragang Island and the port of Newcastle on surrounding residents. I have written to New South Wales Premier Barry O'Farrell to reiterate the urgent need for publicly accessible 24/7 air and water quality monitoring as well as 24/7 alert and notification systems to be put in place in Newcastle. I have also questioned the adequacy of the provisions and enforcement practices under the New South Wales environment protection act and requested they be urgently reviewed.

The New South Wales government's handling of this incident to date has been nothing but deplorable. This inquiry, however, does present an opportunity to learn from these appalling mistakes and secure a better long-term balance between Newcastle's industry and the right of nearby residents to live free from the fear of harmful pollution and to know that their health and welfare are being taken very seriously.

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to raise three issues in relation to grievances within my electorate. Firstly and most significantly in terms of the sad news today of the loss of 200 jobs from the Western Port steel works run by BlueScope at Hastings in my electorate. Secondly in relation to a better deal for autism families and thirdly a matter on behalf of petitioners within my electorate.

I turn firstly to the issue of BlueScope Steel and the loss of 200 direct employee jobs and approximately 60 contractors jobs from the Long Island steel plant, sometimes known as the Western Port steel plant at Hastings in my electorate of Flinders. This is a desperately sad outcome for workers, for their families and for the town and community of Hastings and the surrounding areas. Hastings is a town of approximately 8,500 people. To lose 260 jobs from within Hastings and the broader area is a big blow to the working population. I think every member of this house takes their job seriously and would feel the weight of that loss. It is significant and it is real.

On the macroeconomic matters let me say that we have endeavoured to be utterly responsible with accepting that this has been primarily caused by the combination of the high Australian dollar, the high cost of inputs in terms of raw materials for steel, the low price being given in terms of sale and demand and the extremely poor export markets for a variety of reasons not the least of which is the massive production of North Asian steel across China, Japan and Korea. This is a reality and we are not claiming that this set of job losses was caused by the carbon tax because it predates them, but having spoken with company executives let me be absolutely clear that they said it was their fiduciary duty to consider the fact that the formal package which they face at the moment is a four-year package but that their net present value estimates for the future in calculating how they look at long term investments are made over 40 years. They cannot bank on a change of government; they are not in a position to assume a change of government so therefore they have to assume a carbon tax in precisely the form that the government has set out with a four-year assistance package but a 40-year tax, given that it is planned out to 2050. Those are real considerations but we have been responsible in saying that this outcome today is in its immediate form the consequence of deep and difficult global conditions for Australian manufacturing.

Against that background the worst thing that could possibly happen, given the fragility of Australian manufacturing as seen by OneSteel last week and as seen by Blue Scope this week, the worst thing that could happen is to add an additional carbon tax on top of it. For those who rightly care about the environment, this will do nothing for the environment because it will simply shift the weight of production to less regulated environments in China, India and Indonesia whether it is steel or injection moulding for plastic or cement or other such products. That is the reality. We will simply shift the burden of production and the emissions generation to other environments with the carbon tax in this form at this time. It is the single worst thing we could do.

In terms of the individual package for the workers, I appreciate the outline of that which has been done by the Prime Minister. We called for action immediately and I understand of course that the Prime Minister's office may well have had a heads up. I raised four matters in dealing with the Prime Minister's office and associated departments this afternoon. Firstly, having spoken with workers who have been retrenched prior to today, the package should extend to workers who were released in the last month because today was the culmination of a process not the commencement of a process. Secondly, consideration has to be given to contractors and if there is a relevant test such as 50 per cent of their income coming from the one supplier being BlueScope, then those contractors for the purposes of the package should be allowed to participate. Thirdly, it is absolutely unacceptable that there is not a comparable package to that given to the Illawarra to assist the Mornington Peninsula with the generation of new jobs. There is a $30 million package, including a $20 million Commonwealth fund. We would expect at least a quarter of that in the case of Hastings and an agreement with the Victorian government. Fourthly, given that the Prime Minister has said that the carbon tax was not responsible, none of this package should therefore be linked to the passage of the carbon tax. To hold support for workers hostage to the carbon tax would be a disgrace. I trust this will not happen, but if it does we will hold this government to account and we will hound, harry and work until such time as the linkage is severed. If the Prime Minister says this loss of jobs is not related to the carbon tax, then compensation cannot, and must not, be tied to passage of the carbon tax, which itself will bring a second wave of effects as surely as night follows day.

I turn to a second topic and that is the status of parents within my electorate and elsewhere in Australia who have struggled with the great challenge of autism. I recently completed a 500 kilometre walk for autism, and the funds raised have been shared between the Abacus Learning Centre and Autism Victoria. I did it from the complete surprise at the number of parents who have outlined the condition of autism and the difficulty in acquiring services to me over the last couple of years. This is particularly so in the case of early intervention as well as support for adults with autism once they leave school. This is a great challenge. Autism is, of course, a tremendous spectrum. At one end are those who are highly functional but who suffer from sensory overload, which may manifest itself in the form of extreme shyness or sensitivity to light, noise and smell or perhaps aversion to water with all the social consequences that flow from that. As part of that process we raised about $31,000 for Autism Victoria and the Abacus Learning Centre in Hastings. Abacus was set up by parents such as Michael and Lauren Moore and many others to help young children try to get the building blocks necessary to be able to manage their autism and to learn as well as they can. Many of these children have gone on to sensational outcomes. The dux of Westernport Secondary College two years ago was a boy with autism, but he was supported by his friends and his fellow students. They tolerated the differences and he in turn was able to flourish despite the challenges. On the walk we visited over 52 schools; we had constituents join as all the way. I was delighted that one mother, Natalie, joined for 180 kilometres and another, Marilyn, joined for 200 kilometres. The walk for them became a totemic statement about their own sons, Lewis and Joel, each of whom has autism. We worked with students all around the electorate of Flinders. I want to thank all my staff who were involved—Tina and Melina, Lyn and Denise, Wendy and my great friend Sue de Bono. The task as we go forward is to push for a national autism summit with three specific goals: firstly, early intervention; secondly, respite; thirdly, individual support. In the brief time remaining I wish to table a petition on behalf of the Mornington Peninsula human rights group, whose views I respect very much.

Anthony Byrne (Holt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

) ( ): I rise tonight again to defend the residents of the Holt electorate and surrounding areas. People who are not from Holt or from the outer suburbs of Melbourne—suburbs like Cranbourne, Narre Warren, Lyndhurst and Devon Hills—are often very quick to judge these suburbs and the character of the people that live there and the industries that sustain these communities. But in actual fact, they know very little about the people, although they rush to judgment about the suburbs and the industries that make up this region. So my grievance contribution tonight addresses again the values, the opportunities and the dreams of the people of the Holt electorate, those little known or often written off aspirations and achievements that are dismissed by people willing to trash talk a suburb based on a sensational incident or article or sometimes even a postcode.

I have often said in this place that I get frustrated with the depiction of Fountain Gate, where my electorate office is, as a suburb defined by Kath & Kim and a party boy called Corey who put Narre Warren on the map for all the wrong reasons or if I read in the local papers recently about driving and speeding offences in Cranbourne. I can tell you for a start that the people in Fountain Gate do not share the particular perspectives on the way they are portrayed in Kath & Kim.

Let me give you a synopsis of the people in my electorate. They are family oriented and they have sacrificed a lot to buy a house, to send their kids to school and university and to maintain their involvement in sport and in their community. They are there to create a better future for themselves, their kids and their grandchildren. Many have come from overseas in postwar years to settle down in Australia as skilled workers or as students. Many others are second, third and fourth generation Australians. In my time representing this area there has been much discussion about young people. Let me tell you about some young people from my electorate that have gone on to do some amazing things.

Let us start, for example, with Andrew Bogut who grew up in Endeavour Hills and has been a sensation for Australia at basketball. Born to Croatian immigrants, Bogut was selected first overall by the Milwaukee Bucks in the 2005 NBA draft. The seven foot, 260 pounds centre was a star at the University of Utah for two years before declaring for the draft. Bogut is the first Australian player to be drafted No. 1 overall. Bogut has played six seasons in the NBA and finished third in votes for the 2006 NBA Rookie of the Year award. Bogut's international career began with Australian's 2003 junior world championship team and has also led him to compete for the Boomers of the 2004 Athens Olympics, the 2006 FIBA World Championship and the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Bogut has become a local legend and it is great and salient that he still resides in the south-eastern suburbs of Melbourne during the NBA off season.

Samantha Downie, another young local, has made her mark on the fashion world since appearing in Australia's Next Top Model. Like many other young people from Holt, she studied at Monash University's Barrie campus, just one of the number of tertiary institutions that are in the region, and that make up a rapidly growing education hub for the south-eastern suburbs. Speaking with students from Casey Grammar in Cranbourne last week about their plans beyond year 12, I was delighted to hear the unlimited nature of their dreams and their aspirations. Some were showcasing their obvious talents for The Wizard of Oz musical at the Arts Performing Centre that the school acquired under the BER funding. Others were planning to study law at university and others were more interested in broadening their horizons with significant travel, work and volunteering opportunities abroad.

Contrary to many media reports, many young people in Holt personify the next generation of investment savvy, career confident go-getters that this country needs. They are financially responsible and independent young people. Apprentices have moved on to complete their trades and many I have spoken to have probably moved into business and home ownership. The last census recorded that Holt had the highest figure amongst electorates for homes being purchased at around 55 per cent. Why wouldn't people want to live at the foot of the Dandenongs where there are great schools, great amenities and great shopping centres like Fountain Gate?

As a long-term resident of Endeavour Hills, I know the appeal of living and raising a family in these suburbs, and that suburb in particular. The high level of home ownership in my electorate tells of the dreams and aspirations of the people in Holt. It says that my constituents believe in creating their financial security based on the quintessential Australian asset, the home, and at the same time contribute to this nation's wealth as best they can.

One of the main reasons families are choosing to come and live in the outer suburbs of Melbourne is the great infrastructure—great schools. In my electorate of Holt the Australian government has invested some $129 million across 101 projects to improve the quality of our schools in the local community via the schools modernisation program, the BER. This was clearly evident when I opened new learning facilities at Chalcot Lodge Primary School earlier this month, including a TV studio, radio station, vegetable garden and cookery centre. All families, teachers and students were delighted with these new facilities, which will make a huge difference in helping students reach their full potential.

Another reason for people continuing to come and live in my electorate of Holt is that it offers families a wide range of sport and recreational facilities for everyone to enjoy. Whatever your sport or recreation needs, you are sure to find what you are looking for. According to the statistics from the City of Casey in Holt, in surrounding areas there are over 620 parks and reserves, 258 playgrounds, 10 skate parks, 21 BMX tracks, many off-road bicycle paths, 200 sports clubs and 105 sports grounds. In addition to these many parks, gardens, playgrounds, skate parks and sporting centres, including Casey Fields, the premier outdoor sports and recreation site in Melbourne's south-east, Holt also offers two exceptional aquatic and leisure centres—the Casey RACE in Cranbourne and the Casey ARC in Fountain Gate—as well as Myuna Farm, where the farm comes to the city, and Frog Hollow Reserve in Endeavour Hills. Frog Hollow Reserve in Endeavour Hills is one of those wonderful multiuse parklands in my local area. This park is surrounded by residential properties along the north-west boundary from the eastern corner at Hallam North Road and the southern end abutting the Monash Freeway. Active recreational facilities currently present at the site include rugby facilities, cricket facilities and Auskick.

It is also worth mentioning that the Friends of Frog Hollow Reserve have played a critical role in improving the local environment, protecting local frog species in the reserve and organising events such as the National Tree Day plantings, which were held on 31 July 2011 and were enthusiastically embraced by many local residents. Two individuals in particular, Steve Hallett and Ray Darbritz, from the Friends of Frog Hollow Reserve, have been working in this area for over 10 years. It has been phenomenal to watch the transformation of a place that was almost desert-like into a lush, green, biodiverse area, a fantastic habitat for rare frogs, flora and fauna. It has been an amazing experience watching that transformation, which has been done by two people.

The Holt electorate is also known for its proximity to the manufacturing heartland of Australia. Some 22 per cent of the workforce in my electorate are employed in manufacturing, which is the most of any federal electorate in Australia. What annoys me is that we hear a lot about the mining boom that this country is going through and the benefits to the national economy, and we do not deny that. But, notwithstanding the terrible news that we have been hearing recently, how often do we make manufacturing front and centre in discussion about the national economy? The workers in my electorate, from forklift drivers, fitters and turners to machine operators and many more, are the people who have toiled away to make a living, and many proudly have the rewards of home ownership and financial independence to show for it. Interestingly, many people who I think are ill informed—and economic commentators, I might point out—dismiss the manufacturing sector, forgetting the incredibly proud history that our sector has and the tradition of Australian innovation and building practices. The comment that I have heard even recently in some discussions is: 'Eventually all manufacturing will go offshore—right?' Keep that sort of attitude and it will. But we cannot afford for that to actually happen. Let me tell you, with the quality of the manufacturers in my electorate and the commitment that they have, they are ensuring that that will not happen. Companies like Jayco, just outside my electorate—an amazing company built by one man—Icon Plastics, Grenda Bus Company, basically run by the Grenda family for many years, are icons of manufacturing in Dandenong. For those who criticise people around and in my electorate, get a sat nav, come down and see that these people are some of the best people in Australia and one of the best electorates in Australia to represent. (Time expired)

Robert Oakeshott (Lyne, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Despite being a strong advocate of pricing carbon I disagree with the statement that climate change is the moral challenge of our time. Instead, in my view, there is a bigger one. The real moral and economic challenge of our time is access and participation rates in Australian education, particularly the structural inequities for regional Australians, poor Australians and Indigenous Australians. Heather Ridout of the Australian Industry Group highlighted this problem when she reported on Q&A several weeks ago that over 40 per cent of Australian workers cannot read or comprehend the standard operating manual. This echoes reports that six million Australians are functionally illiterate or innumerate. This in anyone's language should be seen as a massive structural failure. I do not know how or why we got here but I am disgusted we are here. These figures are a shameful failure of the way education policy has interacted or not interacted with business and our broader community. We are all too comfortable leaving too many Australians out of full engagement in our society.

Australia is missing out on significant productivity gain waiting to happen through a ready made home-grown workforce waiting to be engaged if we seize the opportunity post-Bradley to shape the education options better than we have in the past. From the most recent figures available, we have more than a 25 per cent difference in the access and participation rates for metropolitan versus regional students, for Indigenous versus non-Indigenous students and for rich versus poor. Regional, poor and Indigenous being left behind—in my view, it is shameful.

I represent an electorate that is regional, Indigenous and poor and for that reason I am determined to do what I can to see this issue addressed. In the post-Bradley environment, while I acknowledge there are those who are nervous or fearful about certain aspects of a demand-driven system, from my perspective I am seeing much greater engagement between the higher education system and local communities such as the mid-North Coast of New South Wales.

I had previously never talked to a vice chancellor until late 2008. Now the conversations are detailed and many and there does seem to be a real desire to engage better with regions like the mid-North Coast than what has gone before. If Bradley has contributed to this then Bradley is working. The inequities in regional, Indigenous and poor access and participation figures in higher learning are now being acknowledged and the start of addressing these inequities, I hope, has begun. Culturally, this want to address the inequality in these three key areas is challenging many communities. If I am honest about my region, and I know it would be similar elsewhere, there is a certain level of comfort in being on the receiving end of inequity. It is easy to be left out or left behind because it is then someone else's fault.

Higher education has traditionally been positioned as something for the top three, maybe three or four, out of 10 students. There is a bit of a 'group think' from the others to make it okay that only the 'smart people' do higher learning. It is almost oxymoronic logic in my view that gets comfort from the fact that the smart go on to higher learning as an argument to justify why not to.

This cultural logic in Australia is now being challenged in my region and I hope in others. We are starting to reject the assumption that smart people do higher learning and instead we are insisting that higher learning helps make smart people. As I said in my first speech to this parliament in 2008, the motto I want engrained into the minds of young people from the mid-North Coast—and right around Australia—is study for a job, study for a job, study for a job. This is not a conversation about the three out of 10 who, wherever they are from, will succeed. They will be the post graduate engine room that keeps all universities viable into the future and go on to achieve wonderful things in their fields of interest around the world.

But in my view, the great challenge to overcome within Australia is the inequity of how to better engage the seven out of 10 students who do not have the cultural aspiration to engage. Many of these will be the very first in their families for generations to even think about higher learning. Many will cop grief from brothers, sisters, mothers and fathers for the mere thought that they could go to university, or to do higher learning generally. Many are not the top secondary students but many still have a glimmer of want to go further and are easily lost for a whole number of social and cultural reasons. Many face social realities that are vastly different from the top end of any town, whether Sydney or Melbourne, making an 'apple with apple' entry mark system into higher learning, for example, a further contributor to the inequity that we are already trying to overcome. In my view this is the challenge of the moment and the next step for reform considerations.

Post-Bradley, we have seen structural change to challenge the education system to better engage on this question of inequity. I am less worried than some about the uncapped, demand-driven implications of these changes, although I do listen to people, such as Jim Barber from the University of New England, who want to see some special loadings and support for regional universities, particularly those which may be challenged by an uncapped, demand-driven system. Generally, I think there are more opportunities for education and for regional education than there are threats posed.

What is an emerging concern, however, is the 'Bradley-readiness' of the broader communities where cultural change is being sought. As an example, only last month at one of my local land councils nine traineeships were on offer with guaranteed jobs at the end—good jobs—but the land council executive had to scout around the meeting room and around the community for ideas of who could fill these welcome places. It is not that potential candidates do not exist but that for a whole number of complex reasons there is a reluctance to take up the opportunity presented. There is a clear demand inequity in Indigenous communities, in the regions and for the poor, but the emerging concern and challenge is that we may be left with a supply problem unless we engage and empower communities much better than we have in the past. This is where our model of 'place based' learning becomes so critical, and is now in need of greater investment than ever before. Without more thought and more work I am not sure those who are being targeted through structural reform will be picked up and empowered by education options that we all want on their behalf.

The call today, therefore, is for government to do some more parallel work in aspiration-building in key communities. It is a huge step to be the first in the family to choose higher education and more guidance and support to make this happen is needed. If anyone needs to borrow a model to get started on this community capacity building, I am very proud that we have our own—I call it the mini-education revolution—on the mid-North Coast of New South Wales. We recognise this challenge and are actively looking to do what we can to assist and empower.

In 2008, when I was first elected, I found a very difficult local education environment. The secondary education streams were at war with each over the rollout of the technical colleges, the three secondary streams were hotly contesting everything that moved and there was very little engagement between the secondary and tertiary sectors, both public and private. Seventeen of us decided to do something about it and formed the Port Macquarie Education and Skills Forum. Its brief was to build as many seamless pathways as possible, with a student focus on collaboration, not duplication. The council led the charge and employed someone full time to put together a local access and participation in education strategy. The Education and Skills Forum adopted a 40 per cent or higher bachelor degree by 2025 as a local target, coming off a very low base of 12 per cent. We all knew it was aspirational but we chased the desire to participate. As meetings continued, it became increasingly obvious how little the various streams within the education had previously talked to or trusted each other. It was also obvious how powerful, at a local level, these talks and this trust can be when addressed.

As a consequence of this work and many issues now being sorted out locally I think we are positioning ourselves to be able to address inequality within our region and to be an example for others. Due to the success of the Port Macquarie model we have a similar one in the Manning Valley. The Manning Valley Education and Skills Forum is now up and running with the Macleay Education and Skills Forum hopefully coming soon. I am also pleased to hear that beyond my own electorate the wheat belt of Western Australia has picked up this model and is in the process of replicating it.

To conclude, reforms in education will not matter as much as they should unless key local communities are fully networked and empowered. There is work needed from government to assist in this regard. Unless local communities have greater ownership of this process, and are empowered through the place based model of thinking, then Canberra will struggle to achieve the desired outcomes we all want to see happen and we will have a lesser education reform agenda than we otherwise could have. From my perspective that would be a huge opportunity lost for dealing with the moral challenge of our time.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is hard to accept or believe that in a democratic country as wealthy as Australia many people with a disability in their families are still left to struggle each and every day. Most Australians assume that if people are born with a disability or acquire one later in life some system, somewhere, will take care of them. Sadly, this is not always the case. People with a disability, their families and their carers know only too well the daily struggle for services and support—how often the system fails to deliver essential services. They know how often desperate families are left to fill the gaps.

There is also huge inequity. People receive different levels of support depending on how, when and where their disability was acquired. This situation will only grow worse in the future. As the population ages and as medical intervention at birth increases, the number of people with a disability will surely rise. At the same time, the number of unpaid carers, family members and friends who are willing and able to provide support will decrease. It is therefore time to take stock and plan properly for the future. We need a vision for equity, for fairness and for justice for those with a disability and the wonderful people who look after them.

A national disability insurance scheme represents a fundamental reform to the way services are funded and delivered. It is a social reform of the scale of the introduction of Medicare and compulsory superannuation—two safety nets that are now taken for granted by every Australian. In a budget of $350 billion, surely we can find in our hearts, if not our finances, the additional dollars. The Productivity Commission certainly thinks we can find the money. We just need the political will.

We are fortunate enough in my electorate of Riverina to have wonderful organisations such as Valmar at Tumut and Kurrajong Waratah based in Wagga Wagga, which dedicate their care, expertise and services to provide support for people with disabilities as well as independence and reassurance to their families. On August 15 I was proud to open the Tumut waste and recycling centre, which is staffed by people from Valmar as well as people from the local Tumut Shire Council.

On 27 July 2011 I toured many of the establishments fostered by the people of Kurrajong Waratah, which has a fantastic administration. The Chief Executive Officer, Steve Jaques, and Communications Manager, Cathie Smith, were justifiably proud to take me around and remind me of the opportunities for people who might otherwise struggle to find meaningful employment in everyday life. Kurrajong Waratah offers services to all ages and is not restricted to just helping people with disabilities but also helps their families, carers and friends.

People with a disability, their families and their carers want to participate in the social, economic and cultural life of the nation, but there are many barriers to their full inclusion, and this is something Kurrajong Waratah breaks down. Starting from a young age with Kurrajong Early Childhood Intervention Service, Kurrajong provides an early childhood intervention service for many families who have a child aged from birth to school entry age with a disability or developmental delay in two or more areas. The services it offers can often lead to the child never needing assistance from Kurrajong Waratah again, which is the main aim of the centre. For children who go on to need assistance, a lot is offered in later life to keep disabled people in everyday society at their own pace.

Lack of support and services means families are primarily responsible for meeting the needs of their family member who has a disability. Many families struggle with high rates of physical, emotional and financial stress. That is why Kurrajong provides the optimum quality of service, from a children's and adolescent's accommodation support service that provides group home accommodation in Wagga Wagga for school-age children who have a disability to RetireLink in Leeton, which provides a flexible service that responds to the changing needs of people with disabilities who are ageing. It offers its clients opportunities to develop new interests, maintain skills and enjoy community participation.

Kurrajong Waratah, which commenced operations in 1957, with the aim of meeting the needs of people with a disability and their families, has done so for the people of the Riverina-Murray areas ever since and has done wonderful job. Its aim continues today, with more than 700 babies, children and adults receiving their services and support daily. It focuses on the ability and the potential of the individual. Kurrajong continues to ensure that its programs are designed to create awareness in the community of the needs and abilities of people with disabilities and their families. The community education program helps draw public attention to the needs and aspirations of babies, children and adults with disabilities and their families. It creates greater awareness of their capabilities and of the significant contribution they can make to the life of their community. Unfortunately, not all areas are as lucky as mine. However, in saying this Kurrajong Waratah covers only a portion of southern New South Wales. We need more services and help for society's most vulnerable. I am proud to say my predecessor Kay Hull, who is a wonderful and true humanitarian, is now a director of Kurrajong Waratah and is continuing her dedication and work for the people of the Riverina in that capacity.

The economic case for reform for the national disability insurance scheme has been described in terms of the number of people with a disability increasing significantly in the next 20 years, while at the same time the number of people willing and able to provide unpaid care will fall. Government is responsible for funding the difference between the two. The resulting increase in costs has the potential to overwhelm state treasuries. If current growth continues, the amount spent on specialist disability services alone will double in 14 years. A national disability insurance scheme will ensure governments have the ability to meet current and future needs, whatever the economic climate. It will also provide other important economic benefits. As I say, I see it as an investment. By focusing on early intervention and identifying those support services that are most effective and efficient, the scheme will maximise the potential and facilitate greater independence for those who most need it. By providing people with what they need, when they need it the scheme will ensure people with a disability, their families and carers every opportunity to reach their full potential. Providing people with a disability with what they need and when they need it should also reduce the pressure currently experienced by families and able them to more fully participate in work, life and the community. It will also allow them much-needed respite.

The scheme could be funded by all taxpayers through general revenue or through Medicare type levy. That will have to be worked out. The modelling needs to be worked out, but as I say the Productivity Commission has said that we can do it. If the commission says we can do it, then surely we can find hopefully through bipartisan support the political will to do it. Funding for essential care, support services, therapy, aids and equipment could then be drawn from this consistent pool of funds. The principal beneficiaries would be those people whose disability has a significant impact on their daily life. Most importantly the scheme would provide support no matter how that disability was acquired. People born with a disability or who acquire a disability through accident, injury or as a result of a medical condition or with a mental illness would all be eligible for assistance. Eligibility for the scheme would be transparent based on careful assessment. A system would be person centred and individualised, based on the choices of the person with a disability and their family. It would focus on early intervention and provide those supports which produce the best long-term outcomes. It would maximise opportunities for participation and productivity. The system would be fair, efficient and equitable.

There are difficult issues which must be confronted before the scheme can be introduced, such as eligibility criteria and levels of benefit. The interface between the disability, aged and health care sectors must also be assessed. That is why the productivity commission has been given the responsibility for conducting an inquiry into a national disability long-term care and support scheme, an inquiry which they have found can be managed, can be funded and should be funded by government. The commission was aided in its work by a commissioner with specialist expertise in disability, as well is an independent expert panel. The commission conducted public consultations as part of the inquiry and accepted written submissions. At this point I have to praise the efforts of councillor Anne Napoli at Griffith, who recently held a morning tea to raise awareness of NDIS. No one in the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area has done more to raise the awareness and push the case for an NDIS than Anne Napoli; I commend her everything she has done.

A disability could happen to anyone at any time. All Australians deserve the peace of mind which would come with knowing that support will be there if they need it. We all benefit from a more inclusive, more diverse community, and this is why the NDIS scheme is favourable, necessary and an investment in our nation and why organisations such as Kurrajong Waratah need more than ever our ongoing help and funding.

Debate adjourned and resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Main Committee adjourned at 22:00

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, in writing, on 23 March 2011:

(1) How many think tanks or policy institutes are funded by the Minister's department, and

(a) what are

(i) their names, and

(ii) key areas of research, and

(b) in what office/agency within the department do they fall.

(2) What sum of funding was provided to each of the think tanks or policy institutes in part (1) in

(a) 2007-08,

(b) 2008-09,

(c) 2009-10, and

(d) 2010-11.

(3) For each think tank or policy institute in part (1), on what date

(a) was an announcement made that it would be formed, and

(b) did it commence operating.

Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Defence Science and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

the answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

(1) Three.

(1) (a) (i)—(ii) and (1) (b)

(2) (a) to (d)

* Invoices for the final two payments have not yet been received from the University of Queensland. The final figure will be similar to previous years.

(3) (a) to (b)

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in writing, on 10 May 2011.

(1) Is it a fact that Telstra's access network is required to be decommissioned as customers are transferred from it to NBN Co Limited's network.

(2) What number of customer premises are today connected by Telstra's access network (to the nearest 100 000) using (a) copper wire, (b) hybrid fibre coaxial, and (c) fibre optic cable.

(3) Which, if any, of the following components of Telstra's access network are required to be decommissioned under the agreement: (a) copper wire, (b) hybrid fibre coaxial, and (c) fibre optic cable.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:

(1) Under the framework for Telstra's structural separation, Telstra's migration plan will provide for the progressive disconnection of Telstra's copper network and the broadband capability of its hybrid fibre-coaxial (HFC) network as the wholesale-only NBN Co fibre network is rolled out.

(2) According to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) Communications Report 2009–10, as at June 2010, there are 8.66m Telstra standard fixed-line telephone services in operation (p.30). This figure includes services provided over the public switched telephone network (PSTN) and other fixed-line technologies. It also includes both retail, including residential and business, and wholesale services.

According to the NBN Co Limited's Corporate Plan 2011–13, the number of subscribers on Telstra's HFC network is 0.4m (p.42).

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Internet Activity Survey (IAS), as at December 2010, there were a total of 24,000 fibre access connections in Australia. This figure includes connections provided on Telstra fibre networks and other fibre access provider networks. The IAS can be found at: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/.

(3) The definitive agreements provide for the progressive disconnection of Telstra's copper network and the broadband capability of its HFC network as the wholesale-only NBN Co fibre network is rolled out.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, in writing, on 10 May 2011:

In respect of the department's Reform of Government Scorecard (November 2007 to May 2010):

(1) What savings have been achieved under the new contractual arrangements referred to on page 2, for the provision of domestic and international air services and Travel Management Services to the Government since 1 July 2010.

(2) What sales have occurred since February 2009 under the new Commonwealth Property Disposals Policy referred to on page 3.

(3) What savings have been achieved under the new guidelines for property management referred to on page 4.

(4) What progress has been made on the (a) ICT workforce plan and government career structure, and (b) whole-of-government ICT sustainability plan, both referred to on page 5.

(5) What savings were made in the 2010 calendar year on advertising expenditure, following on from the earlier savings referred to on page 5.

(6) What savings were made in 2009-10 on expenditure for consultants, following on from the earlier savings referred to on page 6.

(7) What is the status of the installation of TelePresence technology being installed in 29 sites across Australia, referred to on page 7.

(8) Did the Standard Business Reporting system referred to on page 10 become operational on 1 July 2010; if not, when did or will it become operational, and what is the reason for the delay.

(9) What progress has been made in relation to the Regulation Stocktake, both in implementing the achievements outlined on pages 11-12, and in progressing further initiatives.

(10) What progress has been made on the mandatory publication of individual grants on departmental websites referred to on page 13.

(11) What progress has been made on the commitment to identify and document specific projects to make use of social network and 'crowd sourcing' tools and techniques to enhance agency policy making, implementation and continuous improvement, referred to on page 14.

(12) What are the balances of funds remaining in the Building Australia Fund, the Education Investment Fund and the Health and Hospitals Fund referred to on page 15, as at 31 December 2010.

(13) What is the progress of legislation to form a single trustee body, the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation from 1 July 2010 referred to on page 16.

(14) What is the progress of service delivery reform and improvements by the Department of Human Service in the areas outlined on page 19.

(15) What is the status of coordinated procurement contracts in each of the areas outlined on page 21: (a) courier services; (b) office removals and staff relocations; (c) travel services; (d) security guarding services; (e) transactional banking services, and (f) subscription services.

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Minister for Finance and Deregulation has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question:

(1) The whole-of-government air travel arrangements commenced on 1 July 2010 and delivered $160 million savings to the Budget over the period 2010-2014.

(2) For the period February 2009 to 21 July 2011, 28 sales have occurred under the Commonwealth Property Disposals Policy. Details are provided below.

Open Market Sales:

Priority Sales (including Concessional Priority Sales):

Priority sales are those made direct to a State, Territory or Local Government without the property having first been offered for sale on the open market. Priority sales usually occur where a sale to a State, Territory or Local Government would optimise housing and/or community outcomes. Concessional sales are those priority sales concluded at a purchase price below market value in cases where the sale facilitates a Commonwealth policy objective.

(3) The savings measure is applied to agencies that exceeded the occupational density target where the lease/building contains more than 500 m² of usable office area. The savings are realised progressively as existing leases expire.

Over the period 2010-11 to 2014-15 inclusive, the Commonwealth anticipates realising efficiencies delivering $145.6 million in savings from improved property management practices with $48.5 million retained by agencies and $97.1 million returned to the Budget.

A breakdown of these figures per financial year is below:

(4) (a)

Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997Public Service Act 1999

(b) This question should be referred to the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.

(5) Australian Government departments and agencies spent a total of $112.8 million on advertising campaigns in 2010, compared with $115.3 million in 2009, $86.6 million in 2008 and $254 million in 2007.

(6) Savings were incorporated within a one-off additional 2 per cent efficiency dividend, implemented by Government with effect from 1 March 2008. A specific target for consultancy expenditure was not set.

(7) All 29 sites are now operational, with 5 additional sites installed to support initiatives such as the Queensland Floods Recovery and CHOGM Taskforce.

(8) Yes.

(9) Pre-2008 Review of Subordinate Regulation

The Minister Assisting on Deregulation and Public Sector Superannuation, Senator the Hon Nick Sherry, announced the completion of the systematic review of all Commonwealth subordination legislation made before 2008 (Pre-2008 Review) on 31 March 2011.

Across portfolios as a whole, the Pre-2008 Review identified 4,204 legislative instruments, or around 14 per cent of the stock, that were redundant or potentially redundant. In the process of identifying the redundant regulations, 10 Acts were also identified that appear to be redundant.

All portfolio ministers have received and acknowledged the final report of the review in respect of their portfolio. Responsibility to action the findings of each report now lies with individual ministers.

Regulatory Offsets

In 2009 a Department of Finance and Deregulation circular provided guidance on the 'one in, one out' principle and a range of other regulatory matters.

Ministerial Partnerships

Five Better Regulation Ministerial Partnerships have now been completed. Three Partnerships are currently in progress.

(10) The Commonwealth Grants Guidelines, introduced on 1 July 2009, require agencies to report information on all individual grants on their department websites no later than seven working days after the funding agreement for the grant takes effect.

In the 2009-10 Certificate of Compliance process, about 14 per cent of agencies reported non-compliance with the seven day website reporting requirement. The majority of these were reported within 20 days of the funding agreement taking effect.

(11) A register of agencies using social media initiatives is available at http://agimo.govspace.gov.au/page/gov2register/, and case studies on Gov 2.0 are available at http://showcase.govspace.gov.au/showcase_types/gov-2-0/. The Government's use of Gov 2.0 has also been reported in the State of the Service Report 2009-10.

(12) The balances of funds remaining in the Building Australia Fund, the Education Investment Fund and the Health and Hospitals Fund, including the uncommitted balances and the cash balances, can be found on the Department of Finance and Deregulation website—http://www.finance.gov.au/investment-funds/NBF/NBF_transfers.html.

(13) Legislation to establish the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation as the single trustee for the main Commonwealth civilian and military superannuation schemes was introduced into Parliament on 4 February 2010, but lapsed when the 42nd Parliament ended prior to the 2010 election. The legislation was re-introduced into Parliament on 24 March 2011, and received Royal Assent on 28 June 2011. The legislation, known as the Governance of Australian Government Superannuation Schemes Act 2011, commenced on 1 July 2011.

(14) This question should be directed to the Minister for Human Services.

(15) (a) Courier services—A preliminary investigation was undertaken in 2010. It identified that further investigation is required in order to determine whether courier services is a viable candidate for a coordinated arrangement. An agency survey will be undertaken to more accurately estimate expenditure and identify scope. The timing of the action is not yet finalised.

(b) Office removals and staff relocations—A preliminary investigation was completed in 2010. It identified that office removals and staff relocations is not a suitable candidate for a whole of government arrangement as a large number of agencies would not benefit. As such, this area did not meet the coordinated procurement contracting arrangements criteria.

(c) Travel services—Phase 1 of the travel services coordinated procurement processes took effect from 1 July 2010. Under those arrangements, a panel of travel management companies was established through which all FMA Act agencies and relevant participating Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 bodies must book air travel. A range of competitive discounted airfares was negotiated with airlines on domestic and international routes. These arrangements have delivered $160 million savings to the Budget over the period 2010-14.

Phase 2 has now commenced, involving the conduct of separate open tenders for travel and related card services, accommodation and short-term car hire services. The tenders for Phase 2 are expected to be released later in 2011, with contracts to be in place by mid 2012.

The Department of Finance and Deregulation has recently undertaken a Request for Information process for travel and related card services to provide industry the opportunity to contribute to considerations about the most appropriate strategy and business model. A similar Request for Information process is being undertaken in relation to accommodation.

(d) Security guarding services—A preliminary investigation was completed in 2010. It identified that security guarding services is not a suitable candidate for coordinated procurement as a minority of agencies had specific contracts and some agencies had these services tied in with other property management arrangements. As such, this area did not meet the coordinated procurement contracting arrangements criteria.

(e) Transactional banking services—A preliminary investigation was undertaken in 2010, which identified that transactional banking is not a suitable candidate for coordinated procurement as there is minimal potential for savings. As such, this area did not meet the coordinated procurement contracting arrangements criteria.

(f) Subscription services—A preliminary investigation was completed in the last quarter of 2010. It identified a wide diversity in subscription services and that many subscriptions were specific to one or a few agencies. Therefore it is not a suitable candidate for coordinated procurement when assessed against the criteria.

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Primary Healthcare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Health and Ageing, in writing, on 23 May 2011:

Of the $370.2 million allocated to the 2010-11 GP Super Clinics Program, what amount (a) was spent in 2010-11, and (b) is in the forward estimates.

Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

The $370.2 million allocated in 2010-11 included $367.9 million in Administered funds for GP Super Clinics and Primary Care Infrastructure Grants and $2.3 million in Departmental funds.

(a) Administered funds expenditure for 2010-11 was $49.6 million.

(b) The budget/forward estimates for the $367.9 million of Administered funding is:

All figures are rounded to one decimal place.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in writing, on 26 May 2011:

Can the Minister indicate the source of the claim Mr Rudd made in a press statement on 7 April 2009: 'It has been estimated that innovation from information and communications technology is the biggest driver of business productivity. It drives 78 per cent of productivity gains in service business and 85 per cent in manufacturing'.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:

The statement made by Mr Rudd on 7 April 2009 is sourced from two reports in the series Macro Studies on the Influence of ICT on Australian Productivity Growth:—Productivity growth in service industries (2005) and Productivity growth in Australian manufacturing (2004).

Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, in writing, on 1 June 2011:

Which (a) weather and rainfall, and (b) river height, recording stations have been closed or ceased operations since February 2008.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has records of station closures since February 2008 in its database of observing stations, as indicated below. It should be noted that a turnover of some 240 rainfall stations in a network of some 7000 such stations during this period equates to an annual turnover of around one percent per annum. The number of new stations opened was about the same as the number that ceased reporting so the overall network was held at close to the same size.

George Christensen (Dawson, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Home Affairs and Justice, in writing, on 22 June 2011:

What is the Government doing to recognise the Australian Federal Police officers who served in the Enhanced Co-operation Program in Papua New Guinea between 2004 and 2005.

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

Police members who serve overseas in a peacekeeping role may be entitled to the Police Overseas Service Medal (POSM). Service with the Enhanced Co-operation Program (ECP) in Papua New Guinea between 2004 and 2005 was deemed as a capacity building mission and not a peacekeeping mission. Subsequently, members who participated in the program are not entitled to the POSM. There are currently no awards within the Australian Honours system for police officers serving overseas in a capacity building role. AFP members may be nominated and receive awards under the AFP's Internal Awards Framework.

Russell Matheson (Macarthur, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Human Services, in writing, on 4 July 2011:

(1) Are Centrelink staff directing customers with disabilities to use the self-service computers at their centres rather than personally assisting them with their enquiries; if so, why.

(2) Is she aware that any people with disabilities may be forced to seek assistance from other customers, which puts their passwords and bank details at risk of becoming known to strangers.

(3) What will she do to rectify this problem.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

(1) No. All Centrelink customers have the choice of using Self Service reporting options (online web based reporting and Integrated Voice Response phone reporting) to satisfy any reporting requirements that they might have. They can still report in person at their local Service Centres if they choose to do so

(2) No.

(3) N/A.

George Christensen (Dawson, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Mental Health and Ageing, in writing, on 5 July 2011:

Can he outline the reason(s) why the submission of 10 September 2007 by the Mackay Division of General Practice Ltd was unsuccessful for a round two Youth Services Development Fund grant under the National Youth Mental Health Foundation (headspace).

Mark Butler (Port Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Mental Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

Headspace conducted the application and assessment process for Youth Services Development Fund grants. I understand that any feedback to the unsuccessful applicants for this process was provided by headspace, if requested by the applicant.