The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. John Hogg) took the chair at 09:30, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
Low Aromatic Fuel Bill 2012
There was one outbreak that sort of spread like wildfire through the Western Desert, which was 12-year-olds, the average age was 11 or 12. A kid came in and showed other kids how to do it and off it took.
When it was managed to be stopped in one community, one of the kids went to the next community and started it up there, and there were another 12 kids sniffing there. It took a couple of months of serious work by a lot of people to bring that one back under control.
Warlpiri families come and go across state borders so, for maximum impact, we would like to see this legislation applied to Western Australia, Queensland and South Australia as well as the Northern Territory. We know that Opal fuel has proven effective but, unless the sale of Opal is mandated, and across the broader region, there is a real danger of sniffing outbreaks and devastating consequences.
We were doing this before Opal, and we would try all the other measures. You could start a youth program in a community and you would get a lot of the sniffers to stop but not all of them. But once you have Opal in a community the sniffing stops and then the youth programs can really go because they are not competing against people who are off their faces all the time.
Opal is a solution that governments and communities can readily implement. Its use in Central Australia has really taken the pressure off communities and provides a breathing space where community workers can actually focus on programs that address the personal and social issues underlying petrol sniffing. When sniffing is rife in a community it is near impossible to do this, the power, violence and dysfunction caused by sniffing is too overwhelming.
The Volatile Substance Abuse Prevention Act of 2005 (NT) has been an effective tool in the NT for ensuring that chronic solvent users who are at risk of severe harm undergo suitable treatment at appropriate facilities.
The committee recommends that the Australian Government continue to consult with the relevant state and territory governments on the possibility of national legislation …
The story of the manufacture and distribution of low aromatic fuel in central Australia, to substitute for sniffable fuel, is a story of spectacular policy success. It is a rare and precious achievement in the challenging field of Indigenous health policy. The initiative has involved a partnership between the private sector, including both large and small businesses, governments at all levels, non-government organisations, and Indigenous communities.
… the introduction of the Opal low aromatic fuel has had the biggest single positive impact on the health and welfare of Indigenous people in the 48 years of our work in remote regions.
… creates, I think, a potential legal minefield.
If the Northern Territory government had in its mind that it ought to regulate it could, as could a Western Australian government, as could the Queensland government.
He told the ministers it was difficult to see how a commonwealth ban on unleaded fuel—which he has previously described as a "legal minefield"—would have a greater impact on addressing petrol sniffing and state and territory legislation.
This bill introduced by the Australian Greens does not in itself cause anything to take place.
… the Volatile Substance Abuse Prevention Act 2005 (NT) has been an effective tool in the Northern Territory for ensuring that chronic solvent users who are at risk of severe harm undergo suitable treatment at appropriate facilities.
That the Minister for Health consider introducing legislation before the South Australian Parliament similar to that encompassed within the Northern Territory Volatile Substance Abuse Prevention Act 2005 …
… that there be further examination of the wording of the explanatory memorandum, consultation and exemption clauses, to ensure that fuel manufacturers are properly included, and the bill does not have unintended consequences—
in the event of supply bottlenecks or disruption—
The committee recommends that the Australian government conclude as soon as practical a subsidy review that covers production of up to 100 million litres per annum of low aromatic fuel.
We are proud of our history of caring for this country over thousands of years. The country tells us who We are. It gives us strength and determination. But now we face great challenges; not only about our country and our culture, but about our survival as Indigenous people.
Dr Brown, it is hard for us to understand why you think it is necessary for you to speak on our behalf, about our country, our culture, and our futures.
The only thing We need saving from, is people who disrespect our decisions and want to see our people locked up in a wilderness and treated as museum pieces.
We are a living people and a living culture. We have faced severe change over the last 200 years, and most of it has been far beyond our control.
I am an old woman now and I have witnessed and lived the despair and hopelessness of many Kimberley Aboriginal people.
The Department of Indigenous Affairs is my bugbear forever. It is a colonial structure that is still in place in this day, in this age and in this country where Aboriginal people are given second-class service.
Get rid of it, please. … Give Aboriginal people the rights of citizens like any other citizens.
Up until Opal was introduced in Central Australia I expected that I would spend my career working on petrol sniffing, community by community … Over my career the best I could hope for using this approach would be to eradicate sniffing in four communities over a period of forty years.
We consider the low aromatic fuel rollout to have been a great success to date. It has completely changed the focus of our work.
… that a legislative scheme for low aromatic fuel not be confined to reliance upon the corporations power.
… that the Australian Government continue to consult with the relevant state and territory governments on the possibility of national legislation to mandate the supply of low aromatic fuel to ensure that there is agreed and coordinated action to address petrol supply.
The bill introduced by the Australian Greens does not in itself cause anything to take place. It is enabling legislation.
The Government recognises the devastating impact of petrol sniffing on young lives and the importance of action to reduce the incidence of petrol sniffing and its impact on families and communities. In this context these Government amendments are in keeping with the Bill’s object to reduce the potential harm to the health of people, including Aboriginal persons and Torres Strait Islanders, living in certain areas from petrol sniffing. The amendments also provide clarity on a number of technical issues to facilitate the clearer administration of the Bill.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Xenophon for today, on account of parliamentary business.
That the following government business orders of the day be considered from 12.45 pm today under the temporary order relating to non controversial government business:
No. 5 Superannuation Laws Amendment (Capital Gains Tax Relief and Other Efficiency Measures) Bill 2012
Superannuation Auditor Registration Imposition Bill 2012.
No. 6 Tax Laws Amendment (Clean Building Managed Investment Trust) Bill 2012.
No. 7 Tax Laws Amendment (2012 Measures No. 5) Bill 2012.
No. 8 Corporations Legislation Amendment (Derivative Transactions) Bill 2012.
No. 9 Personal Liability for Corporate Fault Reform Bill 2012.
No. 10 Superannuation Legislation Amendment (New Zealand Arrangement) Bill 2012.
No. 11 Freedom of Information Amendment (Parliamentary Budget Office) Bill 2012.
No. 12 Judicial Misbehaviour and Incapacity (Parliamentary Commissions) Bill 2012
Courts Legislation Amendment (Judicial Complaints) Bill 2012.
No. 13 Access to Justice (Federal Jurisdiction) Amendment Bill 2011.
No. 14 National Health Security Amendment Bill 2012.
That the order of general business for consideration today be as follows:
(a) general business notice of motion no. 1049 relating to the Australian Labor Party and trade unions; and
(b) orders of the day relating to government documents.
That the following general business orders of the day be considered on Thursday, 29 November 2012 under the temporary order relating to the consideration of private senators' bills:
No. 51 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Bioregional Plans) Bill 2011
No. 90 Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment (Excessive Noise from Wind Farms) Bill 2012––second reading speeches only.
That the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment (Excessive Noise from Wind Farms) Bill 2012 may be proceeded with before the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee reports.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Prohibition of Live Imports of Primates for Research) Bill 2012
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 , and for related purposes—Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Prohibition of Live Imports of Primates for Research) Bill 2012.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
This bill, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Prohibition of Live Imports of Primates for Research) Bill 2012 amends the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 to disallow the import into Australia of live primates for the purposes of research.
The bill does not ban the use of primates for research per se – which is a separate issue that requires rigorous examination. There are three government funded facilities in Australia that breed primates for research. Permits for the importation of live primates have been neither sought by these facilities, nor issued since 2009.
Nor does the bill provide a blanket ban on the importation of primates for other purposes such as zoos.
This bill thus formalises current practice whereby primates have not been imported for research purposes to Australia for many years
It also ensures Australia does not participate in the unethical trade of wild-caught primates used in experimentation for the research industry.
Australia is signatory to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which commits to ensuring international trade in flora and fauna does not threaten their survival. All non-human primates are listed as CITES specimens, and as such wild-caught animals may not normally be traded.
Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council's (NHMRC) policy on non-human primates for scientific purposes also states that "whenever possible investigators obtain non-human primates from National Breeding Centres".
The global wildlife trade is recognised as one of the biggest threats to biodiversity conservation, and the major trade in nonhuman primates – as live, as body parts or as meat – presents a significant risk to their conservation in the wild.
The illegal and unsustainable trade in primates is "increasingly recognised as an urgent threat to conservation" and is described as a "conservation crisis". One of the main sources of nonhuman primates to meet global demand is Southeast Asia. Since the 1970s Indonesia has been a major exporter of monkeys.
When India and then Bangladesh banned primate exports in the late 1970s, Southeast Asia became "a major hub of wildlife trade". With its concurrent highest rate of tropical deforestation on the planet, the loss of its biodiversity is described as "an impending disaster".
The list of threats causing decimation of the world's wild primates is a long and bleak litany which includes the trade in monkeys to supply the booming biomedical and pharmaceutical research industry.
Around the world an estimated 100,000 to 200,000, nonhuman primates, or monkeys, are used in experiments every year, and tens upon tens of thousands of monkeys are traded around the world to meet the research industry demand. According to US Department of Agriculture figures, in the US alone the use of nonhuman primates in experiments rose from 57,518 in 2000 to 71,317 in 2010.
There is considerable clinical evidence that much animal-based research correlates poorly with the human response. This is confirmed by scientific reviews that show correlations between the results of animal experimentation and human outcomes is negligible, expensive and unnecessary. Most animal experiments do not translate to clinical trials, are not validated, minimally cited, and use methodologies that render findings as unreliable.
For example, Bailey's 2005 scientific critical review on research using animals came to the conclusion such findings "have little or no predictive value or application to human medicine."
Matthews' 2008 paper in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine points out that much of the claimed value of animal research is anecdotal rather than quantitative and that there are "relatively few quantitative studies of the predictive abilities of animal models". Where such studies do exist in toxicity testing, "the data provided by these studies is typically incomplete, ambiguous, and subjected to inadequate or incorrect analysis." However "the evidential weight of animals models that emerge are at best inconclusive, and sometimes wholly misleading."
The Medical Research Modernization Committee, a health advocacy organisation comprised of medical professionals and scientists, found in their 2006 critical review that "human data has historically been interpreted in light of laboratory data derived from nonhuman animals. This has resulted in unfortunate medical consequences."
The 2006 autoimmune, multiple scleroses and leukaemia drug trial at Britain's Northwick Park hospital where 6 young men suffered multiple organ failure after taking a new drug shown to be safe at a 500 times greater dosage in monkeys, is one such example.
In 2002, the House of Lords Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures stated "the formulaic use of two species in safety testing is not a scientifically justifiable practice, but rather an acknowledgement of the problem of species differences in extrapolating the results of animal tests to predict effects in humans." The Committee also concluded "that the effectiveness and reliability of animal tests is unproven" and that "the reliability and relevance of all existing animal tests should be reviewed as a matter of urgency."
A 2004 UK survey by Europeans for Medical Progress found 82% of general practitioners "were concerned that animal data can be misleading when applied to humans."
Safer Medicines, a British patient safety organisation of doctors and scientists articulates the growing questions from a safety perspective: "whether animal testing, today, is more harmful than helpful to public health and safety" with "alarming evidence that animal tests fail to protect us" in areas from strokes, to AIDS, cancer, autoimmune diseases and more.
Knight's 2007 review on animal experiments found published experiments on chimpanzees, as the species most closely related to human primates, have been shown to generate data of "questionable value" and to make insignificant contributions to cited research – with in vitro studies, human clinical and epidemiological studies, molecular assays and methods, and genomic studies contributing most to the development of combating human diseases.
Not surprisingly, this is because chimpanzees' phenotype, that is their morphology and biochemistry, is markedly different to humans.
Yet with the progressive banning of testing on chimpanzees around the world, the research industry has turned to smaller nonhuman primates that are even more removed from the human phenome. This is despite cheaper and more scientifically reliable and valid methodologies and technologies already existing and being used by more and more laboratories around the world.
The Greens urge government, regulators and research institutions to practice these sophisticated and humane research methods. These include genomics, proteomics, nanotechnology, phage display, microdosing, microfluidic chips, epidemiology, autopsies, computer modelling deducing toxicity based on chemical structure of compounds, more thorough world research databases, and tissue and cell in vitro research such as the Ames Test.
Australia has not permitted the import of live nonhuman primates for research since 2009.
From 2000 until 2009 the CITES database records Australia permitted the live import of 331 Pig-tailed macaques from Indonesia for research. These are listed as Vulnerable to extinction on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
In the same period Australia also permitted the live import of 71 Owl monkeys for research "breeding purposes". This species is also listed on the IUCN red list as "although not necessarily now threatened with extinction may become so unless trade in specimens of such species is subject to strict regulation in order to avoid utilization incompatible with their survival." The IUCN also notes concern that large numbers of these South American species are used in research, and that the issue of wild-caught Owl monkeys "should be monitored to understand the effect on populations."
During 2000-2009 250 long-tailed macaques were also imported into Australia for research purposes. These monkeys are noted on the IUCN red list as suffering declining populations, and a CITES meeting in 2011 expressed as "imperative" a reassessment of the species was needed, given the trapping, laundering and largely illegal trade of massive numbers of wild caught long-tail macaques to support the pharmaceutical industry and its researchers
The European Commission states that the majority of Asian (Old World) monkeys traded for the global research are not bred in western facilities but are born to wild-caught captive monkeys in Asian facilities. The IUCN Primate Specialist Group's Ardith Eudey described these as "lucrative operations ... [that] may serve to 'launder' wild-caught monkeys" to sell as captive-bred to the research industry, and which "appear[s] to have resulted in their disappearance even from legally protected areas".
More than half of the 70 species of primates in Southeast Asia are found in Indonesia, which "features prominently on the list of source countries for both domestic and international trade," and it is from here Australia sourced most of its primates for research until the last importation in 2009.
In 2009, a BUAV (British Union Against Vivisection) undercover investigation confirmed the IUCN's and other scientists' concerns, revealing Indonesia's "official" ban on the export of wild-caught primates for research (in line with its CITES obligations) is a farce.
Monkeys were shown suffering high levels of cruelty during their capture, confinement and transportation, with an endpoint destination of experimentation in the world's laboratories.
BUAV also found Indonesian wild-caught monkeys are coded as "captive-bred". Monkeys wild-living on islands, such as Australia's source island - Tinjil Island - are also coded as "captive-bred" because the whole island is described as a "breeding facility".
The investigation also revealed monkeys trapped in inhumane conditions by villagers who view them as pests and ready income. Baby monkeys are taken from their trapped parents who were often killed rather than being released back into the wild. Mother monkeys are sometimes shot with air rifles forcing them to flee and drop their infants. Monkeys are chased by dogs to be entangled in nets or ropes which often strangled the trapped terrified animals.
The monkeys, including the infants, are then kept in filthy, crowded and barren concrete pens with metal grid floors lacking fresh air or sunlight, many with no access to water or food. In one primate breeding and supply facility infants were kept in small empty pens with smooth walls, no perches and only a wire ceiling, from which the scores of babies would hang frightened in the absence of safe shelter.
Monkeys are then transported around the world, sometimes kept in transit for days, packed into crates too small to stand up in, suffering the noise, inadequate ventilation and extreme temperature fluctuations. If there are transport delays, there is often insufficient food and water.
One UK primate import company alone had a mortality rate of nearly 19% of its delivered monkeys, all from Indonesia, during 1988-1991.
In the 2001 May Budget estimates, it was stated that the three Australian primate breeding facilities were established, among other reasons: "to remove the necessity to import these animals into Australia; and to protect these species in the wild by breeding them in captive colonies"
This bill if passed, would confirm in law that Australia does not support the cruel and inhumane primate trade for experimentation and that Australia will not participate in practices leading to the extinction of primates in the wild.
This is a small but important step.
The Greens support the global scientific 3R principle for the use of animals in research – replacement, refinement and reduction. We support the call by leading scientific researchers and medics, and by important organisations such as Humane Research Australia, for legislators and regulators to support a more methodologically sound and effective science that transitions away from the 19th century practice of animal experimentation to the more sophisticated and credible modern methods of biomedical research already being used with more accuracy and success today.
I commend the bill to the Senate.
That the time for the presentation of the report of the Environment and Communications References Committee on the protection of Australia's threatened species and ecological communities be extended to 28 February 2013.
That the time for the presentation of the report of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee on aid to Afghanistan be extended to 28 March 2013.
That the time for the presentation of reports of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee be extended as follows:
(a) Foreign Investment Review Board national interest test—to 27 February 2013;
(b) fresh pineapple imports—to 20 March 2013; and
(c) fresh ginger import risk analysis—to 20 March 2013.
That the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement be authorised to hold a private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) during the sitting of the Senate on Thursday, 22 November 2012, from 6 pm.
That general business order of the day no. 13, relating to the Restoring Territory Rights (Voluntary Euthanasia Legislation) Bill 2010, be discharged from the Notice Paper .
That the Senate—
(a) notes:
(i) the passing of Major General Alan Stretton, AO, CBE,
(ii) the outstanding work and service of Major General Stretton, as head of the National Disaster Organisation, in coordinating the recovery of Darwin after Tropical Cyclone Tracy, which devastated the city on Christmas Day of 1974, as a remarkable achievement which averted much suffering,
(iii) the admiration in which Major General Stretton was held by the Australian community and that he was awarded Australian of the Year, an Officer of the Order of Australia and a Commander of the Order of the British Empire as well as many other honours, and New South Wales 'Father of the Year', and
(iv) Major General Stretton's distinguished military career over 38 years, including active service in World War II, Korea, Malaya and Vietnam;
(b) recognises his contribution to the Australian community, and, in particular, to the people of Darwin and the Northern Territory; and
(c) extends its sincere condolences to his family, particularly his children Virginia, April and Greg, and friends and colleagues of Major General Stretton.
That the Senate calls on the Government to fulfil its 2007 election commitment to the Australian people by introducing a public interest disclosure bill in the first sitting week of 2013 to comprehensively protect whistleblowers.
That the Senate—
(a) notes:
(i) homosexual acts were decriminalised in Victoria in 1981 but that convictions prior to that date can still appear on a Victorian person's police record, and
(ii) that the United Kingdom (UK) recently enacted legislation to expunge historic convictions for homosexual acts which were imposed prior to the decriminalisation of homosexuality in the UK; and
(b) calls on all Australian states and territories to enact legislation that expressly purges convictions imposed on people prior to the decriminalisation of homosexual conduct.
That the Senate—
(a) expresses deep concern about the upper Spencer Gulf population of the giant Australian cuttlefish (Sepia apama) which has catastrophically declined from a high of over 200 000 individuals in 1999 to less than 10 000 individuals in 2012; and
(b) calls on the Gillard Government to urgently reassess whether or not the upper Spencer Gulf population of this species is eligible for listing under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
The Senate divided. [12:05]
(The President—Senator Hogg)
That the Senate—
(a) notes the report by the International Energy Agency (IEA), Energy Policies of IEA Countries: Australia 2012 which concludes:
(i) Australia's carbon price scheme is 'an example of the standard of leadership that the IEA has been calling for so that the energy sector can be protected from sudden and vacillating climate policy that paralyses investors and disrupts energy markets',
(ii) Australia's implementation of carbon pricing marks 'the first major fossil fuel energy resource rich economy to take the most cost effective mitigation measure',
(iii) the design of the emissions trading scheme 'fits well' with the IEA's findings on lessons from international experience, with the exception of the free permits and cash given to coal fired generators,
(iv) supplementary policies to the carbon price are required to successfully make a transition to a low carbon economy, and welcomes the establishment of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, and
(v) further incentives should be introduced to increase energy efficiency, covering new buildings and refurbishment of existing building stock, and notes 'much more work' is required on improved fuel efficiency; and
(b) urges the Government to adopt world's best practice by implementing the IEA's recommendation for the removal of free permits for coal fired generators and the phase out of over generous allocations.
The Senate divided. [12:10]
(The President—Senator Hogg)
That the Senate calls on the Federal Government to urgently investigate the serious claims made about Fortescue Metals Group regarding its actions in relation to the Solomon mine site and the Yindjibarndi community and its influence on the Native Title and heritage processes in the Pilbara.
That the Senate—
(a) welcomes the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel and urges all sides to adhere to it;
(b) commends Egypt's leadership role in brokering this agreement, supported by the efforts of the United States, the United Nations Secretary-General and other regional countries;
(c) supports a two state solution to the Israeli Palestinian conflict – a solution based on the right of Israel to live in peace within secure borders internationally recognised and agreed by the parties and reflecting the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people to also live in peace and security within their own state;
(d) condemns the terrorist attack on a bus in Israel on 21 November 2012, which injured more than 20 people, and expresses sympathy to those affected by the attack; and
(e) calls for any public demonstrations or rallies in Australia to be peaceful, and not target private businesses or individuals.
3. Supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict—a solution based on the right of Israel to live in peace within secure borders internationally recognised and agreed by the parties and reflecting the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people to also live in peace and security within their own state;
That the Senate take note of the report.
Superannuation Laws Amendment (Capital Gains Tax Relief and Other Efficiency Measures) Bill 2012
Superannuation Auditor Registration Imposition Bill 2012
That these bills be now read a third time.
Tax Laws Amendment (Clean Building Managed Investment Trust) Bill 2012
That this bill be now read a third time.
Tax Laws Amendment (2012 Measures No. 5) Bill 2012
That this bill be read a third time.
Corporations Legislation Amendment (Derivative Transactions) Bill 2012
That this bill be read a third time.
Personal Liability for Corporate Fault Reform Bill 2012
That this bill be now read a third time.
Superannuation Legislation Amendment (New Zealand Arrangement) Bill 2012
That this bill be now read a third time.
Freedom of Information Amendment (Parliamentary Budget Office) Bill 2012
That this bill be now read a third time.
Judicial Misbehaviour and Incapacity (Parliamentary Commissions) Bill 2012
Courts Legislation Amendment (Judicial Complaints) Bill 2012
That these bills be now read a third time.
If the AWU were to set up a slush fund, effectively a re-election fund today which called itself a fund for training and workplace safety, would that be legal?
Well, you can't use members' money to engage in the re-election of officials. That would not be appropriate. … But you cannot ever use members' money for purposes other than the advancement of the industrial interests of the members.
My role here was that as a lawyer I provided advice on the incorporation of an association. I was never connected with the operation of any fund, never connected with the operation of any fund. I was not an office bearer of the association, I was not involved in its activities, I was not involved in any bank accounts it may have held, I was not an official of the AWU, I was not in charge of the conveyancing file. So you are effectively asking me why didn't I report to authorities things I did not know.
I hope that after the nasty personal politics of the last few months, in particular, we can focus on how do we actually build a better country.
On 22 November 2012 Senator Brandis asked:
I refer the minister to comments by Mr Richard Britten, the Police Commissioner of Nauru, reported in the Fairfax press today indicating that the Nauruan authorities wished to pursue wilful damage and riot charges against two Iranian asylum seekers to answer for their alleged role in the riot at the processing centre which caused $25,000 worth of damage. Can the minister confirm that the Australian government agreed to the men's request to be voluntarily returned to Iran without having to answer for their alleged crimes?
Response:
The Department has not facilitated the removal of anyone who was charged with any offence on Nauru.
Law enforcement matters are an issue for the Nauruan Government.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Sport (Senator Lundy) to a question without notice asked by Senator Cash today relating to detention centres and asylum seekers.
The Labor government's policies toward asylum seekers were mistaken from the very first minute they were put in place, and they continue to be dogged by mistakes to this very day.
It might have been less painful for Labor if the government had just embraced John Howard's hard asylum-seeker policy in one fell swoop. Instead it has been an excruciating crawl back to the Coalition days. Each change cuts into the souls of some in the ALP …
Five years of backflips, bad judgment, half-baked proposals and piecemeal border protection steps culminated yesterday in Immigration Minister Chris Bowen running up the white flag on Labor's half-hearted Pacific solution.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (Senator Conroy) to a question without notice asked by the Leader of the Australian Greens (Senator Milne) today relating to the Murray Darling Basin Plan.
Commonwealth Government response to Environment and Communications References Committee report
The capacity of communication networks and emergency warning systems to deal with emergencies and natural disasters
November 2012
INTRODUCTION
The Senate Environment and Communications References Committee tabled its report, The capacity of communication networks and emergency warning systems to deal with emergencies and natural disasters on 23 November 2011. The report contains six recommendations. The Commonwealth Government response to each of the recommendations made by the Senate References Committee, are provided below.
While the Commonwealth has a national coordination role, primary responsibility for the protection of life, property and the environment rests with the states and territories, who are the first responders to emergencies in their jurisdictions. Therefore, state and territory emergency management agencies have full autonomy in relation to: (i) whether and when to issue an emergency warning, (ii) which delivery mechanisms to use to disseminate the emergency warning, and (iii) the content of the warning. Individual states and territories choose which warning technologies to adopt and when to activate them in accordance with the specific circumstances of an incident.
All states and territories have disaster or emergency plans that include a communications component for the dissemination of rapid onset emergency warnings to the community. At the Commonwealth level, the Bureau of Meteorology (the Bureau) issues warnings and watch notices via the broadcast media, HF Radio and Fax, recorded telephone and the internet, directly to the public for weather warnings (such as severe thunderstorm, high sea, flood and tropical cyclone warnings) and, in conjunction with Geoscience Australia, also issues tsunami warnings. Warnings issued by these agencies also inform the warning messages that state and territory control agencies disseminate to the public.
The states and territories are also responsible for the communications systems within their jurisdiction. The Commonwealth’s role is to support public safety operations by, inter alia, making adequate provision of spectrum for use by agencies involved in the defence or national security of Australia, law enforcement, or the provision of emergency services, including for use by other public or community services.
RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation 1
2.11 The committee recommends that interoperability of narrowband voice radiocommunications between federal, state and territory emergency service organisations is achieved as soon as practicable and that all services attending major incidents be compelled to maintain a common emergency communications platform to ensure seamless real time communication from and to the Incident Controller.
Commonwealth Position: Supported
The Government supports this recommendation, noting all jurisdictions are moving towards mobile radio networks that support real time and seamless communications.
The Attorney-General’s Department (AGD) through its membership on the National Coordinating Committee for Government Radiocommunications (NCCGR) is working with the states and territories to achieve improved narrowband voice communications interoperability within the indicative time frame set out in the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) endorsed framework. This work includes achieving consensus amongst all jurisdictions on technologies and Standard Operating Protocols that will assist with moving towards fully interoperable radio networks and operating procedures. The Government understands that the COAG endorsed framework does not prescribe a single technology for jurisdictions (and agencies within them); rather that each jurisdiction as part of their current and future procurement cycles considers technologies that will enable voice communications interoperability with other Emergency Service Organisations (ESOs) throughout Australia. Accordingly, relevant Commonwealth agencies are in the process of planning to transition their voice communications to systems that will be interoperable with state and territory ESOs operating within spectrum harmonised for government use in the 400 MHz band.
Recommendation 2
2.50 The committee recommends the Commonwealth Government allocate sufficient spectrum for dedicated broadband public protection and disaster relief (PPDR) radiocommunications in Australia.
2.51 The committee further recommends that any allocation of broadband spectrum to emergency service organisations (ESOs) for PPDR must be provided on the basis of interoperability amongst Australian ESOs and with ESO counterparts overseas.
Commonwealth Position: Noted
The Radiocommunications Act 1992 states that the object of the Act is to provide for management of the radiofrequency spectrum in order to:
(a) maximise, by ensuring the efficient allocation and use of the spectrum, the overall public benefit derived from using the radiofrequency spectrum;
(b) make adequate provision of the spectrum:
(i) for use by agencies involved in the defence or national security of Australia, law enforcement or the provision of emergency services; and
(ii) for use by other public or community services;
(c) provide a responsive and flexible approach to meeting the needs of users of the spectrum;
(d) encourage the use of efficient radiocommunication technologies so that a wide range of services of an adequate quality can be provided;
(e) provide an efficient, equitable and transparent system of charging for the use of spectrum, taking account of the value of both commercial and non-commercial use of spectrum;
(f) support the communications policy objectives of the Commonwealth Government;
(g) provide a regulatory environment that maximises opportunities for the Australian communications industry in domestic and international markets;
(h) promote Australia’s interests concerning international agreements, treaties and conventions relating to radiocommunications or the radiofrequency spectrum.
The then Commonwealth Attorney-General, the Hon Robert McClelland MP, and the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator the Hon Stephen Conroy,
co-chaired a roundtable meeting on 10 May 2011 on the matter of public safety mobile broadband. The key outcome of that meeting was the establishment of a multijurisdictional high-level officials’ Public Safety Mobile Broadband Steering Committee to progress this work, led nationally by the Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department and the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy.
Membership of the Committee includes representatives of the following key national stakeholder groups, committees and agencies:
The Committee has analysed public safety mobile communications needs, developed models to meet those needs and collected information to assist the ACMA in its determination of spectrum requirements.
The Commonwealth has worked with the states and territories to develop a national implementation plan for a nationally interoperable public safety mobile broadband capability. In parallel with this activity, the Commonwealth has considered whether radio spectrum should be allocated and, if so, what the quantum of a possible allocation would be.
The Commonwealth announced on 29 October 2012 that it would make provision for 10 MHz from the 800 MHz band for the specific purpose of realising a dedicated, nationally interoperable public safety mobile broadband cellular 4G data capability.
The offer of the spectrum to the states and territories will be at a Public Interest Price and is conditional on factors including:
In terms of interoperability with counterparts overseas, this will be guided by the domestic approaches that those countries take as well as future outcomes of key fora such as regional radio harmonisation in region 3 (the Asia-Pacific region in which Australia sits).
Recommendation 3
3.63 The committee recommends that the Commonwealth Government together with national, state and territory emergency service organisations and radio and television broadcasters, develop a secure database of up-to-date contact details for key personnel to be used during an emergency.
Commonwealth Position: Noted
The Commonwealth, state and territory agencies and the ESOs all have media services and dedicated databases in place that perform this role.
The Australian Government will work with the states and territories, through the Australia-New Zealand Emergency Management Committee (ANZEMC) (formerly the National Emergency Management Committee), to effectively coordinate the maintenance of appropriate contact details in both emergency service and media organisations for use during an emergency.
Recommendation 4
3.69 The committee recommends the Commonwealth Government require guaranteed access to emergency call services for people with a disability at all times.
Commonwealth Position: Noted
The Government is a member of the National Forum on Emergency Warnings to the Community which has recently completed drafting the document, ‘Inclusive Communications Guidelines for Emergency Managers’. These guidelines, when finalised, will be used as a tool to help emergency managers understand the requirements to assist people with disabilities during emergencies. They are intended to be used in conjunction with each state and territory’s own policies and procedures.
The Government is aware that people who are deaf, hearing and/or speech impaired often have limited access to emergency services outside of the home as a result of not being able to access a teletypewriter to call the National Relay Service (NRS) dedicated emergency number 106. In response to this need, the Government included mobile access to text-based emergency services for people who are deaf, hearing impaired and/or speech impaired in the new NRS tender. On 15 August, the Telecommunications Universal Service Management Agency (TUSMA) issued a request for tender to identify and select a company(s) to provide the NRS for the next five years. The tender has now closed and a public announcement is expected in early 2013.
On 12-13 January 2011, the NRS experienced interruption for nearly 24 hours as a result of severe flooding in Brisbane where the NRS call centre is based. However, it should be noted that this interruption did not affect access to the 106 emergency number. Since that time, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has been working with the NRS service provider, Australian Communication Exchange (ACE), on lessons learnt and opportunities to better mitigate disruptions in the event of similar emergency situations. This has resulted in a number of new initiatives, including new redundancy strategies and software improvements, to better prioritise certain types of calls.
Recommendation 5
3.81 The committee recommends emergency service organisations in collaboration with television and radio broadcasters, the print media and other relevant organisations, use regular and ongoing public education well in advance of an emergency situation as an opportunity to teach the public about their responsibilities during an emergency and how they can appropriately prepare themselves for such an event.
Commonwealth Position: Noted
The Commonwealth notes this recommendation is directed at emergency service organisations, radio broadcasters, the print media and other relevant organisations. However, in a broader context, the Commonwealth and all state and territory governments are implementing the COAG National Strategy for Disaster Resilience 2011 (the Strategy).
The Strategy focuses on building disaster resilient communities across Australia, including educating people about risks and that disaster resilience is a shared responsibility. Aligned to this Strategy, the Commonwealth delivers education programs including:
The recently released DisasterWatch phone app provides access to emergency and disaster information in a mobile device format derived from authoritative sources in the states and territories and agencies. The app also provides public educational information, such as how to prepare for various hazard events. More than 11,000 downloads of the app have occurred since its launch in December 2011.
Recommendation 6
4.33 The committee recommends the government consider granting public broadcasters priority access to fuel during times of emergency for the purpose of broadcasting emergency warnings and information, and in a way that does not impede the ability of emergency service organisations to access fuel.
Commonwealth Position: Noted
Australia’s state and territory governments have constitutional responsibility for planning and coordinating the response to fuel shortages within their territorial boundaries and have appropriate legislation and associated response plans in place to manage such emergencies.
Whilst every jurisdiction has legislation in place to address a liquid fuel supply emergency, not every emergency will trigger the use of that legislation. Many emergencies that include localised fuel distribution issues, but which do not include an overall fuel supply problem for the jurisdiction, are managed under general emergency response legislation rather than liquid fuel specific legislation.
As such, during an emergency within a particular jurisdiction, determinations about access to fuels, including for public broadcasters, will be a decision for the relevant state or territory government.
At a national level, the Liquid Fuel Emergency Act 1984 (LFE Act) grants the Commonwealth Minister for Resources and Energy the power, by legislative instrument, to identify a person or organisation as an essential user of fuel for the purpose of a national liquid fuel emergency. Declaration of a national liquid fuel emergency under the LFE Act remains a low probability event, as it would require a severe (i.e. prolonged and widespread) national shortage of fuel.
Government Response to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee Report on the:
Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Bill 2012
November 2012
Australian Government response to recommendations of Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee report on the Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Bill 2012
Summary table of Government response to recommendations
The following tables summarise the Government’s response to the recommendations from the Committee’s report.
Of the Committee’s twenty one recommendations:
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation 1
The committee recommends that the application of the exception in proposed APP 2.2(b) be clarified to make it clear that APP 2.1 does not apply where it is impracticable for the APP entity to deal with ‘individuals who have not identified themselves or used a pseudonym’.
Response: Accept
The Government notes the committee’s view that a clarification to the provision would be helpful to ensure that it is clear that Australian Privacy Principle (APP) 2.1 does not apply where it is impracticable for the APP entity to deal with individuals who are seeking to use a pseudonym. The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Bill 2012 (the Bill).
Recommendation 2
The committee recommends that to avoid confusion, the subheading to proposed APP 7.1 in item 104 of Schedule 1 of the Bill be amended to read 'Use or disclosure' or 'Direct marketing', rather than 'Prohibition on direct marketing'.
Response: Accept
The Government acknowledges that amending the subheading of this section may be helpful in more accurately reflecting the substance of the provisions. The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Bill.
Recommendation 3
The committee recommends that proposed APP 7.2 and APP 7.6 in item 104 of Schedule 1 of the Bill be amended to ensure consistency with the notification requirement in APP 7.3, and enable individuals the opportunity to opt out of direct marketing communications at any time.
Response: Accept in principle
The Government agrees that consumers should be able to opt out of direct marketing involving the use or disclosure of their personal information at any time. That is the practical effect of APPs 7.2, 7.3 and 7.6 although the point at which they are made aware of the opt-out requirements may differ depending on the relationship between the direct marketer and the consumer.
The Government notes that companies engaged in direct marketing under APP 7.3 will be required to give notice about an opt out mechanism in each direct marketing communication and should consider adopting this approach as good privacy practice. However, given the different forms and contextual nature of online direct marketing, and the likely future developments in this area, the Government’s preferred approach would be for additional practical level details to be covered by guidance issued by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC). In that respect, the Government notes that it has already accepted an Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) recommendation that the OAIC develop and publish detailed guidance about the new direct marketing principle (see rec 26-7), including some key aspects of proposed APP 7.2 and 7.6.
Recommendation 4
The committee recommends that proposed APP 8.2(b) in item 104 of Schedule 1 of the Bill be amended to require an entity to inform an individual of the practical effect and potential consequences of any informed consent by the individual to APP 8.1 not applying to the disclosure of the individual's personal information to an 'overseas recipient'.
Response: Accept in principle
The Government notes that the provision already requires that information be provided to the individual about the effect of providing consent in these circumstances. The Government considers any further guidance on meeting this requirement would be best placed in guidance material issued by the OAIC. OAIC Guidelines could provide advice on the information to be given to the consumer so that they are clear that the consequences of providing consent in such circumstances are that the entity will no longer be responsible for the protection of their personal information by the overseas recipient, and what, if any, additional information should be provided where it is possible and practicable for the entity to know of other practical effects or potential consequences.
Recommendation 5
The committee recommends that the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill be revised to clearly explain that an entity will be required to inform an individual of the practical effect and potential consequences of any informed consent by the individual to APP 8.1 not applying to the disclosure of the individual's personal information to an 'overseas recipient'.
Response: Accept in principle
Consistent with the Government’s response to recommendation 4, the Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Explanatory Memorandum.
Recommendation 6
The committee recommends that the Attorney-General's Department revise and reissue the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill to clearly explain the enforcement-related functions and activities of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, as justification for the classification of the 'Immigration Department' as an 'enforcement body' in item 17 of Schedule 1 of the Bill.
Response: Accept
The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Explanatory Memorandum.
Recommendation 7
The committee recommends that the Attorney-General's Department revise and reissue the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill to clearly explain the scope and intended application of the terms 'surveillance activities', 'intelligence gathering activities', and 'monitoring activities' in item 20 of Schedule 1 of the Bill.
Response: Accept
The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Explanatory Memorandum.
Recommendation 8
The committee recommends that the provisions contained in item 82 of Schedule 1 of the Bill and for each Australian Privacy Principle which contains a 'permitted general situation' or 'permitted health situation' exception, a note should be added at the end of the relevant principle to cross-reference proposed new section 16A of the Privacy Act 1988 and/or proposed new section 16B of the Privacy Act 1988, as appropriate.
Response: Accept
The Government notes the committee’s views that the legislation could be more ‘user-friendly’ and that a cross-reference located in some of the APPs to the exceptions in clauses 16A and 16B may be appropriate. The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Bill.
Recommendation 9
The committee recommends that the Attorney-General's Department revise and reissue the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill to explain the intended scope and application of the 'diplomatic or consular functions or activities' exception set out in item 6 in the table to proposed new subsection 16A(1) of the Privacy Act in item 82 of Schedule 1 of the Bill.
Response: Accept
The Government will develop appropriate amendments to the Explanatory Memorandum.
Recommendation 10
The committee recommends that proposed new subsection 6Q(1) in item 69 of Schedule 2 of the Bill be amended to require an appropriate amount of time, such as 14 days, to have elapsed from the date of a written notice before a default listing can occur.
Response: Accept
The Government accepts the recommendation and will insert a requirement that at least 14 days must elapse from the date of the written notice before default information can be disclosed to a credit reporting body.
Recommendation 11
The committee recommends that the written notification in proposed new subsection 6Q(1) in item 69 of Schedule 2 of the Bill be amended to include a warning about the potential for a default listing by a 'credit provider' in the event that an overdue amount is not paid within a set period of time.
Response: Accept in principle
The Government agrees that further information should be provided to consumers about the consequences of failure to pay. However, the Government considers that the Credit Reporting Code of Conduct (CR code) is the most appropriate place to set out requirements on the information to be provided to consumers in the written notice required under 6Q(1). This will ensure that the written notice provides comprehensive advice on what matters must be included, for example additional information about credit reporting and how to obtain a credit report.
Recommendation 12
The committee recommends that proposed new subparagraph 6Q(1)(d)(i) in item 69 of Schedule 2 of the Bill be amended to reflect $300, or such higher amount as the Australian Government considers appropriate, as the minimum amount for which a consumer credit default listing can be made.
Response: Accept in principle
The Government agrees that the minimum amount for a default should be reasonable. The Government recognises that there are strong arguments proposed both for and against changing the current amount of $100. A regulation-making power is included in paragraph (d) of the definition to provide flexibility to vary the minimum amount to a higher level. The Government considers that economic modelling of the impact of changing the minimum amount for the listing of a default to $300 is necessary. The Government will consult with stakeholders on this issue in the development of the Privacy Regulations.
Recommendation 13
The committee recommends that the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, in formulating guidelines under proposed new section 26V in item 29 of Schedule 3 of the Bill, include as a criterion the timeframe within which an individual's 'default information' can be listed by a 'credit provider'.
Response: Accept
The Government agrees that there would be benefit in providing further guidance around the timing of listing default information in the CR Code, and encourages the OAIC, in formulating guidelines under proposed new section 26V as to what should be included in the CR Code, to include as a criterion the timeframe within which an individual’s ‘default information’ can be listed by a ‘credit provider’. This will ensure guidance around the issue of reasonable timeframes within which a listing should be made is considered as part of the CR Code drafting process.
Recommendation 14
The committee recommends that the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, in formulating guidelines under proposed new section 26V in item 29 of Schedule 3 of the Bill, include a requirement for credit providers to fully consider an application for financial difficulty assistance under the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 before an individual's 'default information' can be listed.
Response: Accept
The Government agrees that there would be benefit in providing guidance in the CR Code around the consideration of applications for financial difficulty assistance before listing default information. The Government notes that this will only be relevant where a person has applied for hardship assistance prior to default.
Recommendation 15
The committee recommends that the Australian Government consider prohibiting the re-identification of 'credit reporting information' which has been de-identified for research purposes in accordance with proposed new subsection 20M(2) in item 72 of Schedule 2 of the Bill, and whether a proportionate civil penalty should apply to any breach of that prohibition.
Response: Accept in principle
The Government agrees that the risk of re-identification of previously de-identified personal information is an important issue. However, the Government considers that further evidence on the nature and scope of the risk of re-identification is necessary. The Government notes that the Commissioner will issue rules relating to the use of de-identified information for research purposes. The Government will review the situation 12 months after the Commissioner issues rules to determine whether additional measures dealing with the risk of re-identification are necessary.
The Government is aware of concerns expressed to the Committee that the provision may prohibit research currently conducted on credit issues in the community. In order to ensure that such research is permitted to continue, the Government will amend clause 20M to provide that research must be in relation to ‘credit’, rather than the narrower concept of the ‘credit worthiness of individuals’.
Recommendation 16
The committee recommends that proposed new sections 20T and 21V in item 72 of Schedule 2 of the Bill be amended to:
Response: Accept in principle
The Government accepts that all entities that hold information should correct it if found to be incorrect. This was the Government’s clear intention in drafting the correction obligations, including the notification requirements. The general quality obligation in 20S and 21U would operate to require the entity holding the disputed information to make the correction. However, the Government considers that the clarification recommended by the Committee would be useful, and that this kind of detail would be best placed in the CR Code.
Recommendation 17
The committee recommends that the regulations made pursuant to section 100 of the Privacy Act 1988 provide a mechanism for 'credit reporting bodies' and 'credit providers' who have received a request for the correction of an individual's personal information to note on the individual's credit file that a correction is under investigation, with the notation to be removed upon completion of that investigation.
Response: Accept in principle
The Government considers this to be an operational matter best dealt with in the CR Code. The matter could also be dealt with as part of education processes to inform individuals about exercising rights already available to obtain credit reports and request corrections. The Government considers that it is important that the suggested notation requirements do not add lengthy procedural steps which extend the length of time required, and add costs to, a process that is intended to be simple and user friendly.
Recommendation 18
The committee recommends that the Bill be amended to enable a 'credit reporting body' or 'credit provider' to correct an individual's personal information in exceptional circumstances, such as in the case of natural disasters, bank error, fraud, medical incapacity, and mail theft.
Response: Accept in principle
The Government agrees that certain exceptional circumstances should be considered by credit providers and credit reporting bodies when listing defaults or considering whether to correct information on an individual’s file. The Government considers that guidance relating to the consideration of exceptional circumstances could be dealt with in the CR Code. The Government considers it a matter for stakeholders to determine the kinds of exceptional circumstances that should be addressed and the way in which these matters should be addressed. As well as this, consumer education initiatives surrounding the Bill should make individuals aware of existing rights in relation to hardship variations, and any other National Consumer Credit Protection (NCCP) Act issues.
Recommendation 19
The committee recommends that the commencement date for the Bill remain at nine months after the Bill receives Royal Assent in order to provide certainty for all relevant stakeholders.
Response: Accept in principle
The Government agrees that a defined commencement date is necessary to provide certainty to stakeholders. However, recognising work to be completed prior to commencement, the Government considers that a period of 15 months is necessary to provide sufficient time for all necessary elements to be in place for an effective transition to the new privacy and credit reporting systems.
Recommendation 20
The committee recommends that before the Bill's commencement date, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner – in consultation with the Attorney-General's Department, as appropriate – develop and publish material informing consumers of the key changes to privacy legislation as proposed by the Bill, and providing guidance to Commonwealth agencies and private sector organisations to ensure compliance with the new legislative requirements.
Response: Accept
The Government agrees that consumer education surrounding the changes to be made by the Bill is important and supports the OAIC’s plans to produce relevant guidance material.
Recommendation 21
The committee recommends that subject to the preceding recommendations, the Senate pass the Bill.
Response: Noted
Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Bill 2012
That senators be discharged from and appointed to committees as follows:
Community Affairs Legislation Committee—
Discharged—Senator Boswell
Appointed—
Senator McKenzie
Participating member: Senator Boswell
Community Affairs References Committee—
Discharged—Senator McKenzie
Appointed—
Senator Boswell
Participating member: Senator McKenzie.
Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Further 2012 Budget and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Commonwealth Government Securities Legislation Amendment (Retail Trading) Bill 2012
Higher Education Support Amendment (Maximum Payment Amounts and Other Measures) Bill 2012
Water Amendment (Long-term Average Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment) Bill 2012
That the Senate notes the challenges for good government posed by the culture of the Australian Labor Party and its special relationship with affiliated trade unions.
… every union has what it refers to as a re-election fund, slush fund, whatever …
PG: And to the extent that work was done on that file in relation to that, it was done by you?
JG: That's right.
PG: And did you get advice from anyone else in the firm in relation to any of those matters?
JG: No, I didn't.
The Attorney-General must rigidly exclude party politics. The Attorney-General—
must act in the interests of all citizens…. One of his functions—
is to determine whether proceedings should be instituted to protect a person facing a charge from prejudicial statements. It is part of the rule of law that persons should not be made the subject of prejudicial statements before their case is tried …
To suggest guilt is prejudicial …
The publication of any matter indicating bad character on his part or otherwise disparaging an accused may be prejudicial …
It is not necessary to impute guilt. To disparage is enough.
It's the phone call a growing number of top business executives receive: Santo Santoro is on the line.
Santo is your man, they say, if you want something pushed in Queensland by a lobbyist …
But Santo Santoro is not just a lobbyist with rolled-gold cronies across Queensland's Liberal National Party. He is a political fund-raiser on a wider stage, too, personally backed by Opposition Leader Tony Abbott as a federal vice-president of the Liberal Party with the role of helping round up big-dollar donations for the party, ahead of the next federal election. … Which Santoro is it who lifts the phone? The political bagman for the federal Liberals, or the highly paid private lobbyist looking for a contract, who happens to be a party elder with the ear of Abbott and a speed dial in Queensland?
… Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce tapped the taxpayer for $2,000 last week to attend the lavish wedding of a granddaughter of an Indian billionaire engaged in delicate negotiations with iron ore matriarch Gina Rinehart to buy two of her Queensland assets.
… there was not even an allegation in all those question times over 10 years—all those question times in the bearpit of the New South Wales parliament, regarded as the toughest in Australia.
There was never a finding against the government I led on the grounds of corruption—never.
Not once between 1995 and 2005; not about the government I led. Australia's record and that of New South Wales in the years I can speak for is exemplary.
… to explain why he—
asserted yesterday that he held no shares in Hapgeti when the company's own annual returns—prepared by Mr Obeid's son—shows the Minister to be the sole registered shareholder?
Is Mr Obeid lying or is he just incompetent?
… is the only Minister to have bought his place on the front bench by bankrolling backbench members of the Labor Party. He paid his way into the Ministry, and the Premier ought to reveal to this House the questions he asked the Minister for Mineral Resources, and Minister for Fisheries, Eddie Obeid, about his disclosures, what the ministerial Code of Conduct obliges the Minister to tell the Premier, and why the Premier continues to help a man who tells lies to this Parliament time and time again.
The Leader of the Opposition in the Senate (Senator Abetz), pursuant to notice of motion not objected to as a formal motion, moved general business notice of motion no. 804—That the Senate—
(a) notes findings by Fair Work Australia that Mr Craig Thomson misused Health Services Union members' funds for sexual services, personal travel and entertainment and to secure a seat in the Federal Parliament; and
(b) condemns the misuse of union members' funds as found by Fair Work Australia.
… the challenges for good government posed by the culture of the Australian Labor Party and its special relationship with affiliated trade unions.
In a column for Britain's Daily Telegraph in 2010, McTernan declared: "The Coalition has a problem with women."
He argued spending cuts proposed by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition in Britain were unpopular with female voters. "This gender gap is a real and pressing problem for (British PM David) Cameron," he wrote.
Last year another column on law and order issues was headed: "How many women today feel the Coalition—
is protecting them?" And just in case you missed the angle, a few months later McTernan focused on women promoted in British Labour's reshuffle, turning it against Cameron: "The PM has a problem with women and he knows it."
"It sends the wrong message to people who want to invest in Geelong," executive officer Bernadette Uzelac said. "We should be making things easier to do business and invest in Geelong and not harder."
Premier Baillieu is right to air the same concerns we did in this space last week when we said we feared for the impact this dispute might have on would-be investors in Geelong.
This dispute has to end now. The longer it continues, the more negative impact on future investment it will have and, the more indifference will be shown to the spirit if not the letter of the law.
Developments like this brewery are very important for our community.
Industrial action like we are seeing in South Geelong—despite court orders—does not send a great message to any company looking to establish a business here.
Member for Geelong Ian Trezise urged the company and the unions to sort out the issue as soon as possible.
radically improve the lot of the worker we must secure a substantial representation in Parliament. Then, and only then, can we begin to restore to the people the land of which they have been plundered, to absorb the monopolies which society at large has tended to create, and to ensure to every man, by the opportunity of fairly remunerated labor, a share in those things that make life worth living.
That intervening business be postponed until after consideration of government business orders of the day No. 13, Access to Justice (Federal Jurisdiction) Amendment Bill 2011, and No. 14, National Health Security Amendment Bill 2012.
Access to Justice (Federal Jurisdiction) Amendment Bill 2011
That this bill be now read a third time.
National Health Security Amendment Bill 2012
That this bill be now read a third time.
Superannuation Legislation Amendment (MySuper Core Provisions) Bill 2012
… superannuation, regrettably, does not operate like a competitive market where consumers make informed and active decisions to place their savings with the best performing funds ... Without active engaged consumers there is little incentive for providers to strive to offer the best possible product delivering the best possible returns.
(1) Clause 2, page 2 (after table item 1), insert:
(2) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 3), omit "However, if the provision(s) do not commence before 1 January 2013, they commence on that day.".
(1) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (line 12), after "29T", insert "or satisfies the provisions of section 29TB".
(2) Schedule 1, item 9, page 9 (line 24), omit "or 29TB".
(3) Schedule 1, item 9, page 9 (line 29), omit "or 29TB".
(4) Schedule 1, item 9, page 11 (lines 7 to 14), omit paragraph 29TB(1)(b), substitute:
(b) that employer is a large employer in relation to the fund (see subsection (2)); and
(6) Schedule 1, item 9, page 12 (after line 15), at the end of section 29TB, add:
(3) An RSE licensee with a MySuper authorisation must report the details of MySuper products for large employers to APRA on an annual basis. APRA may disallow a large employer MySuper product at any time where it does not comply with subsection 29TB(2).
(7) Schedule 1, item 9, page 14 (line 30) to page 15 (line 8), omit paragraph 29U(2)(b).
(8) Schedule 1, item 9, page 21 (line 14), omit "sections 29T and 29TB", substitute "section 29T".
(9) Schedule 1, item 12, page 25 (line 12) to page 26 (line 15), TO BE OPPOSED.
Schedule 1, item 9, page 12 (lines 1 to 15), omit subsection 29TB(2), substitute:
(2) An employer is a large employer in relation to a regulated superannuation fund if there are 500 or more employees of the employer, or an associate of the employer, at the time the beneficial interest in that class is first issued and at the end of each annual reporting period.
That the bill be now read a third time.
Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Amendment Bill 2012
The Senate divided. [20:30]
(The President—Senator Hogg)
This approach is not recommended.
This approach is not the preferred approach at this time.
(1) Schedule 1, Part 1, item 46, page 12 (line 8), omit "13C and".
(2) Schedule 1, Part 1, item 46, page 12 (lines 8 and 9), omit "sections" (wherever occurring), substitute "section".
(4) Schedule 1, Part 1, item 46, page 12 (line 31), omit the note to subsection 14(2).
(5) Schedule 1, Part 1, item 48, page 13 (line 21), omit "13C,".
(6) Schedule 1, Part 1, item 55, page 15 (lines 24 and 25), omit "gender equality indicators, ".
(8) Schedule 1, Part 1, item 55, page 19 (after line 32), after section 19E, insert:
19F Agency to make publicly available the names of employers who submit compliant reports
The Agency shall make publicly available the names of relevant employers who regularly submit reports which comply with this Act.
(9) Schedule 1, Part 1, item 71, page 21 (after line 23), after section 33A, insert:
33B Minister to repeal a legislative instrument when a new instrument is made
If making a legislative instrument under this Act which imposes a requirement on employers, the Minister must cause an existing legislative instrument which imposes a requirement on employers to be repealed.
(3) Schedule 1, Part 1, item 46, page 12 (lines 10 to 20), section 13C TO BE OPPOSED.
(7) Schedule 1, Part 1, item 55, page 16 (lines 15 to 29), section 19 TO BE OPPOSED.
… gives the Minister the flexibility to consider all issues relevant to gender equality and to add new matters.
This approach is not the preferred approach at this time.
… it may be worthwhile, in Ai Group’s view, to introduce a form of positive recognition for organisations which submit regular reports, to provide an incentive to do so. This may be more appropriate and effective than the alternative, which is to penalise those which do not report. While EOWA recognises outstanding organisations through its "employer of choice awards", there are of course numerous organisations which regularly report but for a variety of reasons do not apply for or receive such awards. Recognising organisations which regularly submit compliant report, such as a certification process, could be considered.
The reforms will result in increased compliance costs for businesses who have not previously been compelled to report.
Agency will be provided with the authority to conduct organisational reviews.
The time burden—
would be increased—
That this bill be now read a third time.
Dental Benefits Amendment Bill 2012
It is amazing how the government wants to raise the health of the nation, particularly for people with chronic disease, as it is such a burden to the people themselves and the health system. Yet they cut something as important as this. Being a registered nurse I know first hand how valuable this scheme was to people.
Of particular concern in dentistry, is that young adults, becoming independent of their parents and commencing adult independent life, have essentially equivalent dental needs to older teenagers. One aspect of the teen-age population, is an increase in the rate that decay develops, so that sudden withdrawal of dental services from young people once they reach the age of 18, will result in a corresponding deterioration in dental health in young adults.
There seems no clear reason why the dental care of any individual should be determined on the basis of age…
There is the further practical impact of sending a signal to young people, that once you get over the 'teenage years', that oral health is assured, whereas in fact life-long care is needed, especially as people age and accumulate chronic disease…
Investment in the oral health of children is a sound and sensible investment as it may result in a long-term monetary saving for government and the community by minimizing future deterioration in dental health. There is a substantial body of evidence indicating that early intervention and preventive treatments provided early in life are a proven and well-established method to prevent poor dental health in later life.
A 12-week period, to complete treatment, will mean that patients under the CDDS will not be able to finalise their treatment plans. Treatment of the chronically ill, for which this Scheme was designed, is often complex, requiring an extended period of time. Complex treatments are often staged to allow adequate healing.
The ADA calls on the Australian Government to recognise that it is critical that arrangements are put in place to allow for treatment services to be completed even if this requires introducing a transition process for existing patients on a case by case basis.
Anangu really love to run their own company. Anangu are really proud of this company they own. We need to do this work for the young people to see, they will watch us and learn from us and then it will be their turn to run their own show, to run their own company on their country.
We want to keep teaching our young ones so they can teach the generation which follows them. This is very good work for all aboriginal people living in Central Australia. We are giving our young people every opportunity we can through this company, we are encouraging them and they are coming. The leaders are the Elders, first they teach. It's like filling in the first page of the book so the young person can go ahead and write the rest of the story.
When outsiders come, they will see Anangu, the way we have always been, and the way we are today—strong—holding onto our culture. We put our stories on the canvas and leave it for the children to grow up and learn about the country and culture that surrounds them. When people see Tjala Arts I think they are shocked at what we have created here. We teach our children everywhere in the Art Centre and everywhere else, we show them the story sites. Our stories are really big and powerful, they are everything to Anangu. We don't need pen and paper, we carry our stories in our hearts, in our blood, and the country carries them too.
I worked as a member of the Indulkana Community Council for seven years. I then worked as a Police Aid. Now, I live on my homeland, 10kms outside of Indulkana and today I am semi-retired. I now teach my grandchildren how to make paintings and how to do Inma (dancing) and make artefacts. I tell them how to continue stories about special bush-tuckers, honey ant and jukurrpa (dreamings). I look after my boys and grandchildren. I teach them how to follow the fresh tracks to get emu, perente, and kangaroos. They have to hear about their great, great grandmother and know their culture to keep it strong.
… that a significant increase in funding is required across all schooling sectors, with the largest part of this increase flowing to the government sector due to the significant numbers and greater concentration of disadvantaged students attending government schools.
I strongly believe that the Gonski recommendations should be implemented in full.
I have two children, both with disabilities, and I have not been able to keep them in public schools because those schools simply did not have the resources to provide the relatively minimal extra assistance each of them needed.
Whether children are disadvantaged by disability, by economic circumstance, by location or any other reason, they should always have the genuine option of an adequately resourced public school.
My son, for example, spent a year in the Principal's office and in her Year 6 classroom — when he was in year 2 - because they only had resources to provide extra assistance for two hours a week, and then only for 10 weeks.
I'm sorry, but Asperger's syndrome does not go away in 10 weeks - nor do the effects.
Our educational system should be able to cope with situations like this. But clearly it can't.
My son was only mildly affected, and it has taken several years for him to recover from the trauma of this year. Proper arrangements would have avoided heaps of later expenditure.
My daughter was diagnosed with ADHD in early high school, and could not cope with the learning style of sitting in the classroom and listening. As a result, she ended up leaving school at year 10, - yet it is not difficult for a well-trained teacher to accommodate different learning styles.
These are some of the reasons why we need Gonski.
Education is critical to an intelligent, thinking country, and we need to make it our top priority (and not just for kids). This is the future of our country, of our industry and it should not be essentially restricted to those whose parents have the option - albeit often through great sacrifice - of sending their children to a private school.
I have a year 6 and a year 9 child and am strongly committed to the public education system.
I have been increasing alarmed at the lack of funding for basics at the children's primary schools -even extending to insufficient teachers, - and longstanding teachers' aides being forced to leave even when they are an integral part of the community and workforce within the school.
Specifically my children are both gifted. I have learnt by experience as well as by research, that gifted children have very special needs, and are very much at risk in many ways.
They have a very high rate of anxiety, the boredom they suffer daily puts them at risk of behavioural disorders and depression, and long term they have an incongruously high rate of school drop out.
Rightly - with short resources, the focus is on the lower end of the educational spectrum, but there is not enough money to provide for those needy children.
There is very little left for the gifted kids - who are almost entirely left to fend for themselves in primary school. My yr 6 girl now has to survive another 18 months of boredom before she starts high school and I fear for her.
I have only a small story to tell but it makes me cry writing about it.
At my local Williamstown library, on a cold, wet winters night recently, I was present as two young boys, no more than 11, were fighting over who could use the public computers - not to play games - but to 'get my homework done by tomorrow'.
I felt awful - realising these 2 kids, who lived in the housing commission flats nearby, - were studious enough to come out in darkness and cold on their own to try and research for their assignment....
Whilst my friend's children in the same suburb go on European trips and have the latest.
We must ensure that each child has the same opportunities in life, as much as possible. - That children have access equally to computers, the internet, excursions and various learning opportunities.
Regarding literacy - I've worked in this area and the statistics (and my experience) concerning lack of basic literacy skills to navigate the world (brochures, prescriptions, newspapers etc) - in this great first world country! -are terrible.
This is even before we look at indigenous communities; - right here in our own neighbourhoods.
We must fully support and implement the Gonski recommendations to ensure a functioning, equitable, healthy society.