estimates committee g community care and … food and fibre sciences ... estimates committee g now...

14 Oct 1999 Estimates G—Primary Industries 519

ESTIMATES COMMITTEE G

Mr G. S. Musgrove (Chair)Mr B. W. DavidsonMr D. E. Beanland Mr G. B. Fenlon

Hon. T. R. Cooper Ms L. H. Nelson-Carr

PRIMARY INDUSTRIES

IN ATTENDANCE

Hon. H. Palaszczuk, Minister for PrimaryIndustries

Dr W. Hoey, Director-General

Mr K. Dunn, Acting Deputy Director-General

Dr R. Clarkson, Executive Director, Agencyfor Food and Fibre Sciences

Mr J. Skinner, Executive Director,Corporate Performance

Ms D. Anderson, General Manager,Finance and Business Development

Mr G. Dawson, General Manager, ClientInformation Services

Mr G. Robbins, Institute Director,Queensland Beef Industry Institute

Mrs R. Lea, General Manager, ResourceManagement, Queensland FisheriesManagement Authority

Mr J. Pollock, Executive Director, FisheriesMrs M. Hardy, Principal Policy Officer,

Policy and Legal Services

Mr P. Neville, Executive Director, Policyand Legal Services

Mr K. Jackson, Acting Institute Director,Queensland Horticulture Institute

Ms D. Wanigesekera, Acting ExecutiveDirector, Regional Industry BusinessServices

Mr R. Beck, Executive Director, Forestry

The Committee commenced at 8.30 a.m.

The CHAIRMAN: I declare this meeting ofEstimates Committee G now open. TheCommittee will examine the proposedexpenditure contained in the Appropriation Bill1999 for the areas set out in the SessionalOrders of 27 August 1999. The Committee willexamine the proposed expenditure for theorganisational units in the following order:Minister for Primary Industries; Minister forAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy andMinister for Women's Policy and Minister forFair Trading; Minister for Families, Youth and

Community Care and Minister for DisabilityServices.

The Committee has also agreed that it willsuspend today's hearings for the followingbreaks: morning tea from 10 a.m. to10.15 a.m.; a break from 11.45 a.m. to 12noon; lunch, 1 p.m. until 2 p.m. and two 15-minute breaks at 4 p.m. and 5.45 p.m. Iremind members of the Committee andMinisters that the time limit for questions is oneminute and answers are to be no longer thanthree minutes. A single chime will give a 15-second warning and a further double chime willsound at the end of these time limits. Anextension of time may be given with theconsent of the questioner. A double chime willalso sound two minutes after the extension oftime has been given. The Sessional Ordersrequire that at least half of the time availablefor questions and answers in respect to eachorganisational unit is to be allotted to non-Government members and that any timeexpended when the Committee deliberates inprivate is to be equally apportioned betweenGovernment and non-Government members. Iask departmental witnesses to identifythemselves when they first come forward toanswer a question so that Hansard can recordthat information. I also ask that mobile phonesbe switched off.

In accordance with the Sessional Orders,a member who is not a Committee membermay, with the Committee's leave, ask aMinister a question. In this regard, theCommittee has agreed that it will automaticallygrant leave to any non-Committee memberwho wishes to question a Minister, unless anobjection is raised at the time by a member ofthe Committee. Also in accordance with theSessional Orders, each Minister is permitted tomake an opening statement of up to fiveminutes. Again, a single chime will give a 15-second warning and a further double chime willsound at the end of that time limit.

In relation to media coverage of thishearing, the Committee has agreed that silenttelevision film coverage be allowed for theChairman's opening statement and for eachMinister's opening statement. I now declarethe proposed expenditure for the Minister forPrimary Industries to be open for examination.The time allotted for this is three hours. Thequestion before the Committee is—

"That the proposed expenditure beagreed to."

Minister, would you like to make a briefintroductory statement or do you wish toproceed direct to questioning?

520 Estimates G—Primary Industries 14 Oct 1999

Mr PALASZCZUK: Mr Chairman, I willtake the opportunity to make a statement.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much.The time limit is five minutes.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Thank you. The 1999-2000 State Budget will position theDepartment of Primary Industries to advanceQueensland's food and fibre to the world.Through an enhanced research developmentand extension effort to be driven by newscience, technology and innovation agencies,Queensland will strengthen its reputation as aworld leading innovative food and fibreproducer. Based in the Department of PrimaryIndustries, the Agency for Food and FibreSciences will bring together research,development and extension resources fromacross the department to deliver betteroutcomes for Queensland. The move willmake our department one ofAustralia's—indeed, one of theworld's—leading food and fibre sciencetechnology and innovation agencies. Thedepartment's RD and E program, whichinvolves more than 1,400 staff in 148 centres,attracts $100m in funding. The formation ofAFFS—which, of course, is the Agency forFood and Fibre Sciences—honours theGovernment's election commitment toestablish a world-class science organisation topromote scientific excellence in research,development and extension services for foodand fibre production. Through AFFS, DPI willdeliver improved services to meet the needsand aspirations of existing and new clientsfrom every stage of food and fibre production,manufacture, export and consumption.

The department will assist industry tofocus on environmentally sustainable, safeand quality food and fibre production andensure that it is responsive to global consumerexpectations and market demands. Thedepartment will deliver on this commitmentthrough innovative science and technology,the development of high-value products andservices, trade and market development,sustainable development and rural communitydevelopment.

The 1999-2000 budget for DPI is a cashappropriation of $376m from all sourcescompared with a $381m budget for 1998-99.This means that the Budget allocation willenable the department to maintain currentservice delivery standards and staffing levels.1999-2000 is a transitional year in moving fromcash budgeting to an accrual accountingbasis. All financial statements in the 1999-2000 State Budget papers have beenpresented as far as possible on a comparable

basis. However, some transitional issuesbetween the cash and accrual accountingtreatments should be noted.

It is not possible to draw a validcomparison between the cash programstatements contained within the 1998-99 StateBudget papers published in September 1998and the output accrual operating statementspresented within the 1999-2000 MinisterialPortfolio Statements. Therefore, reference to adecrease of $26.6m on the 1998-99 totalunaudited actual in Budget Paper No. 4 refersto the following: reduced receipts from theDepartment of Natural Resources underservice level agreements with the corporateservices agency for the implementation ofSAP; reduced receipts from theCommonwealth and other States for thepapaya fruit fly program; notional revenue fromgoods received below fair value from otherGovernment departments under AAS29reporting, which are not included in the 1999-2000 estimate; the purchase of SAP softwarein 1998-99; and, of course, the completion ofseveral capital works projects, including theupgrade of the Tick Fever Research Centre atWacol and the completion of the Centre forClimate Applications in Toowoomba. Finally, letme reassure the Committee that there will beno staff reductions and no action has beentaken to curtail or delay service deliveryresulting from the 1999-2000 Budget.

I welcome, as do the officers of theDepartment of Primary Industries who havejoined me, the opportunity to discuss theBudget Estimates with members of theEstimates Committee. The 1999-2000 Budgetrepresents a solid foundation for futuredirections. If I may, for the benefit of theCommittee I would like to introduce the seniorofficers of my department who are with metoday: Dr Warren Hoey, the Director-General;Mr Kevin Dunn, the acting Deputy Director-General; Dr Rosemary Clarkson, ExecutiveDirector, Agriculture Industry Development; MrJohn Skinner, Executive Director, CorporatePerformance; Mr Peter Neville, ExecutiveDirector, Policy and Legal Services; Mr JohnPollock, Executive Director, Fisheries; Mr RonBeck, Executive Director, Forestry. Otherofficers will be available if required to be called.Mr Chairman, I commend the BudgetEstimates to you and welcome questions.

The CHAIRMAN: The first period ofquestions will commence with non-Government members.

Mr COOPER: Minister, I acknowledgeyour remarks and I also acknowledge thedepartmental officers present today—every


one of them. I acknowledge the enormousamount of work that they do in compilingresponses and so on for the Estimatesproceedings.

I will jump a few questions based on theremarks that you made about there being nostaffing cuts. Can you explain why, on page 4of the MPS, staffing levels in the beef industryservices are projected to drop from 216 to205? The Bowen branch of Agforce hasalerted me to the fact that two of its beefextension officers are being offered transfers,leaving the Ayr-based officer responsible forfive shires, 850 properties and some 510,000head of cattle. That involves two officers.There is a total of 11 staff to be cut, asindicated in the figures for the beef industryservices. Those staff cuts are obviously staffcuts. They appear in your own budgetdocuments. Where are they being picked up,if, as you said, there are to be no staff cuts atall?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Firstly, you are right.The Queensland Beef Industry Institute doeshave two extension officers at Bowen atpresent. The department intends to reducethat number by one by Christmas. QBIImanagement has prioritised staffing to betterutilise its resources to meet the demands ofthe beef industry. The extent of the beefindustry in central Queensland and in thesouth west, which includes the ChannelCountry, means that both positions have ahigher priority than a second position atBowen.

QBII's activities in the Bowen, Burdekinand Dalrymple Shires are changing fromscattered pockets of staff and resources in allcentres to a concentration of research andextension staff in Charters Towers who arebetter able to service the changing needs ofthe beef industry. Bigger groups of RD & Estaff are better able to develop innovative andtargeted projects that are more able to meetthe needs of industry and consumers thanscattered staff who then lack the personalcontact to stimulate the creativity needed toplan those required projects. I think you wouldunderstand that. QBII has beef extensionofficers located in Ayr, Mackay and ChartersTowers who are all able to service the BowenShire as required. QBII also maintains aresearch station, Swans Lagoon, at Millaroonear Ayr, with a full complement of beef cattleresearchers and technicians.

In relation to your question on staff cuts,relating to page 4, quite obviously thedepartment is reprioritising, but we are still

maintaining a very healthy complement of staffwithin the beef industry.

Mr COOPER: I guess that is your view,Minister, because a staff cut of 11 is a staff cutof 11. I am worried still about the Bowenbranch because, as I have said, you are goingto have one officer responsible for five shires,850 properties and some 510,000 head ofcattle. Agforce has brought that to myattention. It is concerned and its concerns aremy concerns. I reiterate that they are staff cutsand nothing can change that. Budget PaperNo. 4 states, "After adjusting for the equityreturn in 1999-2000, there is a decrease of$26.6m on the 1998-99 total actual."

What programs have those Budget cuts beendrawn from?

Mr PALASZCZUK: You have asked arather technical question, so I might pass itacross to Mr John Skinner. I will come back toyou in relation to the assertion that there arestaff cuts within the beef industry.

Mr COOPER: It is not an assertion. It is inthe Budget papers that there will be areduction from 216 to 205.

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will come back toyou.

Mr COOPER: Could you also tell me howyou will address the problem in Bowen,because obviously they have concerns andthose concerns should be yours.

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will address that.

Mr SKINNER: As outlined by the Ministerin his introduction, the $26.6m is made up of areduction of $13.7m in operating funding and$12.9m in capital funding sources. Thereduction in the operating funding sourcesavailable to the department primarily relates tolower estimates of own-sourced revenues,largely due to reduced receipts from theDepartment of Natural Resources under theCorporate Services agency implementation ofSAP, reduced receipts from theCommonwealth and other States for thepapaya fruit fly program and notional revenuefor goods received below fair value from otherdepartments under AAS29 reporting, which isnot included in the 1999-2000 estimate. Thereduction in the capital funding resourcesrelates to the purchase of SAP software in1998-99 and the completion of several capitalworks projects, including the upgrading of theTick Fever Research Centre at Wacol and thecompletion of the Centre for ClimateApplications in Toowoomba.

In terms of attempting to makecomparisons on a like with like basis, asoutlined by the Minister in his introduction, the


comparison is in the order of $5m in terms ofBudget adjustment. On a cash basis, the BeefInstitute is largely unchanged in terms ofBudget. In terms of the cash basis, a numberof projects have been completed, includingKingaroy office accommodation and the beefindustry recovery strategy that was a one-off,one year funding. The West Indian drywoodtermite pest incursions and the NorthernTerritory exotic fruit fly projects, for example,have been completed. That shows thedifference between comparing budgets withbudgets.

Mr COOPER: Thank you. Obviously thefigure of $26.6m is still there. I realise that thisinvolves the equity return, but a cut is a cut is acut, similarly with staff numbers. While Irespect your answers, I do not accept thembecause there are still cuts. If the overallBudget of any department is cut, of courseyou will have difficulties through the year.Obviously, that will unfold. Minister, last week,your colleague the Treasurer said that if adepartment's liability dropped, in other words, itdisposed of assets during the financial year, itwill get to keep the 6% equity return. Can youguarantee that DPI will not divest itself ofassets for a one-off money grab of that equityreturn, remembering that the equity returnwas, I think, $11.3m?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will pass thatquestion to Mr John Skinner.

Mr SKINNER: The target that we havebeen given by Treasury in terms of our capitalassets, particularly land, is $1.7m for this year.At the moment, the department has a reviewof all its assets and properties under way,which is being undertaken by the Departmentof Natural Resources. That review will attemptto identify any properties that may be surplusto requirements. We have been advised thatwe will be able to go back to the mid-yearBudget review process with Treasury if webelieve that we have been unable to identifysuitable surplus assets for disposal. That is thesituation until we complete that review andthen we approach the Treasury as part of themid-year Budget review process.

Mr COOPER: I understand how it works.The main thing is, as you have answered, youare looking for properties to dispose of?

Mr SKINNER: That is correct.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Could I add that whatwe are really doing is maintaining ourperforming assets. We are looking at workingwith the Department of Natural Resources totry to minimise the impositions that are putupon us by Treasury. Where we haveperforming assets, they will stay within the

department. I can assure you that the majorityof our assets are performing.

Mr COOPER: You are trying to identifyassets for sale or disposal. We will see whatthose are. We will follow it throughout the year.I know Treasury has made it hard for you.There is no question about that. It is a hugeamount of money. You have to make surethat you do not just succumb to Treasury andits demands to the detriment of DPI. I referyou to page 57 of the MPS and to the tabledheaded Opening Statement. In particular, Irefer you to the 1999-2000 financial year totalsfor user charges, employee expenses andsupplies and services. When you add thecorresponding figures for each of DPI's OutputOperating Statements—that is, on pages 10,15, 20, 24, 29, 34, 39, 44, 49 and 53—thetotal comes to $258.421m. The OperatingStatement on page 57 lists a total of$269.951m. That is a discrepancy of about$11.53m. I seek an explanation for that. Is it asimple miscalculation or has a slush fund beenput aside? What is the reason for that?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I wish it was.

Mr COOPER: Obviously, the idea ofaccrual accounting is to prevent slush funds. Ifthat figure, as I have said, comes to$258.421m and a total of $269.951m is listed,there is a discrepancy. I need an explanationfor that.

Mr SKINNER: I believe the explanation forthat is that we would be comparing accrualwith cash figures. This being a transition year,as outlined previously, it is not possible tomake comparisons between the two, based onone figure being an accrual figure and onebeing a cash figure.

Mr COOPER: I need to know which figureis correct.

Mr SKINNER: Perhaps Danielle Andersoncould discuss that a little further. I think you willfind that they are both correct.

Ms ANDERSON: The 1999-2000 year is atransitional year and we are moving from acash budgeting to an accrual accountingbasis. All financial statements in the 1999-2000 State Budget papers have beenpresented as far as possible on a comparablebasis. However, there are some transitionalissues between the cash and accrualaccounting treatments that should be noted. Itis not possible to draw a valid comparisonbetween the cash program statementscontained within the 1998-99 State Budgetpapers published in September 1998 and theoutput accrual operating statements presentedwithin the 1999-2000 MPS. In relation to the


recast of the 1998-99 Budget figurespresented in the output accrual operatingstatement shown within 1999-2000 MPS,those have been converted to reflect thesignificant accounting policy changes and theintroduction of accrual accounting andmanagement for an outcomes framework.Departmental transactions and activities underaccrual accounting have been separated intothose which are controlled by DPI and thosewhich the department administers on behalf ofthe State Government and according toaccrual accounting standards.

Mr PALASZCZUK: You have given usabout a dozen pages.

Mr COOPER: I know. But we went to thetrouble of adding up those pages. If you wantto take it on notice, I will place it on notice.

Mr PALASZCZUK: No, we are pretty wellright.

Ms ANDERSON: If you turn to page 5 ofthe MPS, you will see that note No. 3 indicatesthat the output summary excludes revenueand expenses relating to the provision ofservices by the corporate services agency tothe Department of Natural Resources and DPIForestry. Corporate services provided to DPIForestry under the service level agreementswith DPI have also been excluded. The outputsummary on page 5 excludes those items asnoted in note 3, and the statement on page57 includes them.

Mr COOPER: Returning to the differenceof $11.53m, we will not call it a slush fund. Youcan call it what you like. What are you going todo with those funds? Will they be taken out?Will you use those?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Could I just put it thisway: both figures are correct. Comparingaccrual accounting methods with cashaccounting methods is like comparing appleswith pears. You cannot compare them thatway. You have to compare apples with applesand pears with pears. This is a transitionalperiod and I think you will find in the nextBudget that things will be a lot different. Thefigures will be much easier to interpret.

Mr COOPER: Not less rubbery.

Mr PALASZCZUK: That is not true.

Mr COOPER: I turn to page 55 and thevessels replacement line item contained in thetable headed Capital Acquisition Statement.The capital funding allocation from last yearwas underspent by $3.134m. In your reply tomy question on notice you stated that threevessels were not replaced during the year asanticipated. Can you tell me why they were notreplaced?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Let me reassure theCommittee that there is going to be noreduction in Boating and Fisheries staff. Thestaffing levels will remain as they are. This yearwe launched the K. I. Ross at Gladstone. It isprobably one of the most modern vessels inboating and fisheries patrols anywhere inAustralia. You mentioned the non-replacementof three vessels. Actually, it is two vessels andan outfit of a third one. I will go through that foryou now.

Our vessel replacement programpredominantly relates to the QueenslandBoating and Fisheries Patrol, which currentlyoperates approximately 95 vessels throughoutthe State. Expenditure under the program canbe quite cyclical as a result of changes inoperational requirements from year to yearand the length of time required to constructmajor vessels. Let us have a look at theMurchison. The budgeted cost was $1.1m. Itwas not replaced pending the outcome andimplications of the Warrego internal review,which was budgeted to cost $0.75m. Therewas another vessel. The new Investigator wasbudgeted to have a refit at about $0.5m.Basically, what we are saying is this: these aremajor vessel replacements. The vessels arestill in very good condition. They areperforming extremely well. But at the end ofthe day when Governments make a decision itis basically the same as a family making adecision on the replacement of, say, a car.You do not do it each year. You wait until youare ready to do it. In this case, this year wehave postponed the purchase of these twonew vessels and the refit of the newInvestigator.

Mr COOPER: For how long have theybeen put off?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Mr John Pollock is theExecutive Director, Fisheries. He might tell youwhere we are now with those three vessels.

Mr COOPER: The question was: whyhave they not been replaced as anticipated?

Mr POLLOCK: The Minister has identifiedthe three vessels. The Warrego is a researchvessel and the Murchison is a vesselbelonging to the Boating and Fisheries Patrol.At my instigation, we have been reviewing thefeasibility of having a vessel that can serviceboth elements of my business group. Myreason for doing that is that they are bigvessels. They cost in the order of $1m to$1.5m each. We were talking earlier aboutasset management. Also, the boating patrolhas increased since the long-term Treasuryfunding for this was put in place about sevenor eight years ago. Since then we have


opened three new patrol bases. I have to lookat different strategies for managing thoseassets. I am withholding the purchase of thoseuntil that review is completed to see whetherwe can feasibly manage with one boatbetween the two groups.

Mr COOPER: Obviously, there is a lot ofpressure on the patrols, because complaintsare coming in all the time. There is anallocation of only $1.679m. In the Cairns Post Inoticed that someone—I am not sayingyou—who was arithmetically challengedclaimed that there had been no cut in thepatrols budget, and yet we have seen quite asubstantial cut. Can you confirm that theNoosa and Maroochydore Boating andFisheries Patrols do not have a vessel capableof offshore patrol work and that they arerequired to use a vessel from Brisbane? Thoseareas are obviously important. They do nothave an ocean-going vessel. They have to getone from Brisbane. In the time that that takes,any need for it has obviously dissipated. Couldyou explain to me why they have to continuallyuse a boat from Brisbane, especially given thecontinual budget cuts in that area?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will pass that on toMr John Pollock.

Mr POLLOCK: There is no budget cutthat I am aware of to the Noosa area. Isuppose if we asked each patrol base whetherthey wanted an ocean-going vessel, theywould all put their hands up. The point is thatwe are servicing with greater than 10-metrevessels from Hervey Bay, from Pinkenba andfrom the Gold Coast. It is my judgment that Ido not need another ocean-going vessel to bebased at Noosa. We program these vesselson a rolling three-month work program. Theycan also have ad hoc or emergent responses,but it is my view that we are adequatelyserviced with ocean-going vessels in south-east Queensland.

Mr COOPER: Minister, would you—

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The time for non-Government questions has expired.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Let me just reassurethe Committee that there has not been anyfunding cuts within the Department ofFisheries. If I can go back to 1994-95, theallocation was $7.588m; in 1995-96, $7.796m;1996-97, $9.290m; 1997-98, $10.436m;1998-99, $10.685m; 1999-2000, $10.759m.In actual fact, there has been a very, veryslight increase in the budget allocation forQueensland Boating and Fisheries Patroloperating allocation and costs. So I do notknow where you got those figures.

Mr COOPER: Out of the budget books.Mr PALASZCZUK: I have just given you

the details of the allocations from 1994-95 to1999-2000. I cannot see any budget cut there.

The CHAIRMAN: We will go now to aGovernment member.

Mr FENLON: On page 30, dot point nineof the 1999-2000 Ministerial PortfolioStatements states that an emerging issue fordeveloping high quality plant and animalbased products is the domestic and globalexpectation for increasing varieties ofconvenient, safe food. What is the DPI doingto assist the food industry in meeting its foodsafety obligations?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The tone of thequestion that the honourable member hasasked is becoming far more relevant in today'sworld not only here in Australia but worldwide.Let me just say this: in Queensland, sincemost of our food products originate in primaryindustries, the department is conscious thatfood safety is critical to retaining consumerconfidence in the industry within Australia andoverseas and the maintenance ofQueensland's export markets for raw andprocessed food products. The primary industrysector is increasingly implementing food safetysystems to improve its capacity to meetcustomer and market needs. The departmentis working in partnership with industry todevelop technologies and systems to underpinthese systems and through the Centre forFood Technology and other units in thedepartment to provide food safety awareness,training, technical advice and verificationservices.

Many primary industries food businessesincorporate hazard analysis and critical controlpoint base systems into systems as they jointlyaddress food safety and quality issues.Measures to assure food safety in primaryindustries are being enhanced. The soon to beestablished Queensland agrifood authority willensure preventive food safety for meat, dairyand seafood products up to the point oftransformation or entering into retail. Thisauthority will contribute to a food safety systemfor assurance of food safety from source tocustomer.

Mr FENLON: On page 32, paragraph 5 ofthe 1999-2000 Ministerial PortfolioStatements, you refer to ongoingreprioritisation as a critical strategy in ensuringindustry and Government responsiveness toemerging trends and opportunities. Inresponding to emerging trends andopportunities, what has the department done


to implement Labor's election commitment fora world class Rural Science Organisation?

Mr PALASZCZUK: In response to thehonourable member, let me just say that theannouncement from the State Budget inrelation to the Agency for Food and FibreScience was a major initiative of thisGovernment. I referred to it in my openingaddress and I believe it does create a greatdeal of importance to not only our industriesbut also our consumers.

The Rural Science Organisation and itspeak science industry council were announcedby me, as I mentioned previously, in the recentbudget. The aim of the Rural ScienceOrganisation is to promote leading edgetechnical innovation through world classresearch development and extension forQueensland's primary industries. Theimplementation of this election commitment isaligned with the Government's priority for aninternationally competitive economy thatcontributes to growth and the creation ofsustainable employment. The establishment ofthe Rural Science Organisation will integrateand stimulate innovation across commoditiesin the longer food chain.

Direction and priorities will flow from thepeak council and individual industrydevelopment councils. Statewide researchdevelopment and extension coordination,innovation and productivity in primaryindustries will be improved in the context ofecologically sustainable development. Staff willhave skills they can market to other institutionsand the private sector for the overall benefit ofQueensland. I think I might ask Dr RosemaryClarkson, who is in charge of putting theAgency for Food and Fibre Science together,to further comment.

Dr CLARKSON: The agency will be madeup of 10 units in the department and the RDand E effort will range from the climate workthrough biotechnology to the work of theindividual institutes—the five industry basedinstitutes—and into the post harvest area ofthe Centre for Food Technology. So we dobelieve that we are now able to address theemerging needs of the food and fibreindustries right along the chain from theworking genetics and production right throughto the retail sector. We believe that, bybringing all those groups together in that way,we can stimulate a lot more creativity andinnovation in that we can have all the groupsworking in biotechnology across all those 10units working together. Those that are workingon GPS and GIS systems and those sorts ofthings can work together and stimulate each

other and, we think, develop far moreinnovative projects for the benefit of the foodand fibre industries.

Mr FENLON: On page 30, dot point 8 ofthe 1999-2000 Ministerial PortfolioStatements, there is an emerging issue inrelation to delivering high quality plant andanimal based products, in particular, tobiotechnology developments. In what majorareas is DPI's biotechnology operating?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Let me first inform theCommittee in response to your question thatthe department is one of the few organisationsin Queensland undertaking biotechnologyresearch and development in the agribusinesssector. Biotechnology has been increasinglyused in the department's research programsover the past decade to improve theproduction systems and the end product forconsumers. A steady build-up in theknowledge and expertise has resulted witharound 85 staff now being employed inbiotechnology research. The department iscurrently using this technology for research inthe grains, horticulture, beef, poultry, pig,aquaculture, sheep, forestry and sugarindustries. Some specific areas undergoingresearch include that molecular markers havebeen identified in cattle for growth rate, meatyield, fat cover, marbling, tenderness andeating quality. This information is now beingused in breeding programs and to placeAustralia at the top of the world meat gradingsystems.

Tick fever disease in cattle costs Australiaaround $28m per year. The department isinvolved in international research to applybiotechnology to the development of tick fevervaccines and diagnostic tests for cattle in bothAustralia and Zimbabwe. In a revolutionaryapproach to management of feral animals, thedepartment is working with Cornell University toinduce sterility by feeding contraceptiveantigens in genetically modified plants.Molecular markers are being used to developvegetables resistant to diseases, leading to areduction in chemical use. $9m is currentlybeing expended by the department onbiotechnology research projects, with abouthalf of them coming from external sources. Tosum up, I can tell the Committee that thedepartment has been working onbiotechnology for the past 10 years. Thedepartment has certainly progressed thebiotechnology research to a point now wheresome of the results of our research are at thecutting edge of world research. I think thepeople of Queensland owe a great deal ofgratitude to our scientists who are involved inthis research.


The CHAIRMAN: I call the member forMundingburra, Ms Lindy Nelson-Carr.

Ms NELSON-CARR: The second last dotpoint on page 17 of the MPS mentions yourhighly successful trade mission to the MiddleEast. What export outcomes and opportunitieswere found for Queensland rural products inthe Middle East following the trade mission tothe United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I presume that thehonourable member has heard me in theHouse refer to the trade delegation I had ledto both the United Arab Emirates and SaudiArabia last April. I have referred to that tradedelegation on a number of occasions in theHouse, because I believe it was a verysuccessful delegation.

To give the Committee an idea of theoutcomes of that delegation, I would just liketo say that this trade mission and thedepartment's New Markets Middle East projectidentified and generated significantopportunities for our DPI's rural clients.Queensland companies negotiated tradecontacts to supply seafood, horticulturalproducts and processed food. This trademission generated immediate trade outcomesof $100,000. Over the next six months weanticipate commercial contracts to reach$800,000. Over the next three to five years thecompanies—and these are just the eightcompanies involved—anticipate tradeoutcomes to reach approximately $10m.

Companies have established relationshipswith key contacts and buyers in these markets.Contracts under negotiation include distributionagreements, direct export sales, licensingagreements and various tenders. Diplomaticrelations between Queensland and the UnitedArab Emirates and Saudi Arabia have alsobeen strengthened by opening the door tohigh-level talks and the development of keycontacts.

A delegation of major retail buyers visitedQueensland in June as a direct result of thetrade mission's visit to Saudi Arabia. One ofthe companies offered our Queenslandexporters the complimentary opportunity todevelop a Queensland-theme food promotionin their Jeddah and Riyadh stores. At this verymoment, those companies are in SaudiArabia. I understand there are well over 20companies using that complimentary serviceprovided by the largest supermarket chain inSaudi Arabia. By promoting Queensland'simage as an efficient and reliable source offood and fibre products, this trade mission hasresulted in future trade opportunities. Thisincludes incoming trade delegations and the

Tamimi Safeways supermarket promotion,which I mentioned to you just previously.

We have also participated in the Saudiagriculture trade show and a Government-ledtechnical mission to the United Arab Emirates.In conjunction with the Department of StateDevelopment, the DPI is also developing athree-year strategy. This strategy aims toconsolidate the initial success outcomesachieved by the New Market's project. In anutshell, it was a very successful tradedelegation. We are receiving some verypositive results.

Ms NELSON-CARR: On page 31, dotpoint 13 of the MPS you make somereference to the appointment of a chiefscientist. What has the DPI done to implementLabor policy in relation to a chief scientist?

Mr PALASZCZUK: In accordance with thepolicy Let's Get Queensland Moving Again,Labor's commitment to primary industry, thedepartment created a position of ChiefScientist. Dr Joe Baker, a very well respectedscientist worldwide, was appointed to thatposition. He has a very distinguished career asa research leader in academia, industry andGovernment. The position of Chief Scientist isa part-time position. This allows Dr Baker tohold prestigious positions with related scientificorganisations, helping the QueenslandGovernment to develop strong and formal linkswith the national and international scientificcommunity. Dr Baker also holds a part-timeposition as Commissioner for the Environmentwith the Australian Capital Territory as well asappointments with international scientificcommittees. In his role as Chief Scientist, DrBaker will advise the Queensland Governmentthrough me as the Minister for PrimaryIndustries in relation to issues relevant to foodand fibre-based science and technology. I canalso add that the position of Chief Scientistwas created in January 1999. It is a part-timeposition with a three-year contract. I think DrHoey would like to add a few words.

Dr HOEY: The role of the Chief Scientist isa very critical one. An agency such as ours hasan enormous research, development andextension resource spread right across theState. We value its development and growthand its ability to keep at a leading edge veryhighly. The chief scientist will help to increasethe profile of our agency. It will help in formingalliances with other R & D providers, which weincreasingly have to do: universities, theCSIRO and other Government agencies. It willmake sure that we are developing our scientificresources not only for today but also tomorrowand the emerging needs that sometimes


surprise us, so that we can make sure that thisagency has the right capacity to deal with theissues facing the primary industries ofQueensland.

Ms NELSON-CARR: I refer to page 25,dot point 1, of the MPS and the commentregarding election commitments. In the lead-up to the last State election in Queensland, anumber of commitments were made byQueensland Labor to improve themanagement of fisheries in this State. Whatare the main achievements to date?

Mr PALASZCZUK: In the lead-up to thelast State election, Queensland Laborpublished a policy statement specificallyrelating to the fisheries of Queensland. Thispublication is titled Let's Get QueenslandMoving Again—Towards a Fishing Future forQueensland. The publication outlines theapproach that the Labor Government agreedto take in supporting fisheries. It also givesdetails of specific initiatives. The policyrecognises that a successful fishing industrywill promote employment and economicgrowth in the State. Our fisheries policystatement has been supported strongly by allsections of the fishing and aquacultureindustries. The elements of our fisheries policyare now being implemented, which include: areview of the roles of the Government fisheriesagencies in Queensland, changes to improvefisheries management and support of thefishing industry—that review has now beencompleted by Mr Peter Neville and I amassessing his review—an expansion of fishstocking, particularly in rural and remote areas;the establishment of a fisheries monitoringteam to improve the level of managementinformation available on the status of ourmajor fish stocks; continuous improvement ofthe planning and approval process foragriculture; and increased emphasis on themanagement of wetland habitats that supportour fish stocks.

The CHAIRMAN: At dot point 1 on page18 of the 1999-2000 MPS you refer topromoting the economic importance of primaryindustries to all Queenslanders via publicrelations events and initiatives. What is DPIcontributing to the Year of the Outback 2002promotion to provide support for this teambased project?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Firstly, I inform theCommittee that Year of the Outback 2002 hasmy total support and the support of theQueensland Government. The Premierannounced Cabinet support for the declarationof the concept in Rockhampton on 31 May1999. This exciting initiative will further bridge

the gap between city and country Australia.The potential for the Year of the Outback isonly limited by our imaginations.

The Premier has noted that Outback2002 offers an excellent opportunity toshowcase the distinctive social, cultural andeconomic characteristics of outback life,including primary production, education, trade,tourism, arts, communication, and Aboriginaland ethnic interests. This promotion, I ampleased to say, has also won the support ofthe Prime Minister.

The idea was first promoted by a leadingQueensland businessman who is pretty wellknown to most people in political circles, MrBruce Campbell, MBE. Our bush icon RMWilliams, whom I visited about three monthsago to ask whether he would like to serve asthe patron of the celebration, has agreed toserve as the patron, which is good news forthe promotion of the Year of the Outback2002.

The department has already supportedthe promotion by providing public affairs andpublication services, including the time andeffort of a graphic artist, who prepared the firstround of promotional material for the project.The department's rural information specialistswill be utilised to disseminate informationabout Outback 2002. The department's website will carry details of Outback 2002 and theDPI call centre will be used to compile adatabase of individuals or groups who expressan interest in participating in Outback 2002.

The new DPI information centre, FarmLink, will also be used to disseminateinformation to its users. The department willalso provide a workstation within the RuralIndustry Business Services group for amember of the project team. The workstationwill include the use of a computer and accessto a telephone, a fax machine andphotocopying service. In addition, on a needsbasis the department will continue to providegraphic artist and desktop services. This is ontop of the assistance given by the departmentto a number of ongoing community basedprojects such as the outback revival inLongreach to help Queensland communitiesget back on their feet and is in line with theGovernment's priority of building Queensland'sregions.

The CHAIRMAN: I call the member forCrows Nest.

Mr COOPER: Just a few moments ago,Mr Pollock, a public servant for whom I have agreat deal of regard said that there was noneed for any more ocean-going patrol vessels,that we could make do with what we have got.


Do you concur with that, Minister? Do youagree that Noosa, Maroochydore and all ofthose areas can be properly patrolled fromBrisbane and elsewhere?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I believe that theservice has adequately patrolled our easternseaboard and I can see no changes to that atall.

Mr COOPER: I inform you that the goodpeople of Noosa and Maroochydore do notagree and that the QCFO and Sunfish do notbelieve that is possible. Page 26 of the MPSstates that compliance with fisheries laws in1998-99 was maintained above 90%. How canthat statement be regarded as credible giventhe massive prawn poaching conducted underyour nose in Moreton Bay earlier this year,ongoing complaints about reef fish poaching inthe north, the absence of the vesselmonitoring system in Moreton Bay, cutbacks toyour colleague Mr Welford's marine parksbudget and the lack of suitable ocean-goingpatrol boats on the Sunshine Coast? How canyou say that compliance rates of over 90% canbe upheld?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will start with theMoreton Bay area. The issue of illegal prawnpoaching has certainly been highlighted thisyear. I became aware of the need to dosomething about the prawn poaching inMoreton Bay and I am pleased to announcethat I am ready to take to Cabinet a limit ofone bucket of prawns per person. Thisequates to approximately six kilograms ofprawns. I believe that is an adequate amountfor our recreational fishers to take. Of course,this will give our Boating and Fisheries Patrolofficers the opportunity to police the illegalpoaching that has occurred over the yearsunder previous Governments. Unfortunately, ithas been there. Boating and Fisheries Patrolofficers have not been able to patrol that,simply because there has been no regulationin place to enforce a one bucket limit. We aregoing to introduce that. I will ask Mr JohnPollock to address the other issues you haveraised.

Mr POLLOCK: I agree with the Minister'sstatement that there was no law to enforcewhen it came to recreational limits for prawns.The decision by the Government to introducethat is just to address that notion of unfairaccess, if you like, and maybe evencommercial trade. That is in hand.

The statement about non-introduction ofVMS into the Moreton Bay trawl fleet is a validone. It was a decision that the VMS committeelooked at seriously. I guess there are a coupleof reasons for not doing that. One is the size

of the boats involved in Moreton Bay. They aregenerally very small trawlers. We have found inthe past that enforcement of any closedwaters fishing works very well on thegrapevine. We do not need VMS becausepeople ring you up and tell you if they aregoing to go anywhere near it. But the costimposition on the Moreton Bay trawl fishermanwas the one issue that led to our decision tonot impose VMS on those boats. We have, asyou know, installed it on some 660-odd eastcoast trawler fishermen where remotedistances are more of an issue for us than isenforcing closed waters.

Mr COOPER: Minister, you are aware thatthere is illegal fishing and illegal sale ofseafood arising from lack of patrols and lack ofinspection. I drew attention to illegal fishing on2 October. Your comments to me on that daywere that you were not aware, that there wasno evidence of a black market in fishingoperating in Queensland waters, that we havea fine patrol and so on. How can you reconcilethat with a statement from Mr Rob Whiddon,the chief of staff of the Premier's office, whosaid when replying to a fishing organisation—

"Your comments regarding illegalsale of seafood have been specificallynoted. Mr Palaszczuk advises theQueensland Boating and Fisheries Patrolofficers are aware of black marketingproblems and have undertaken a numberof prosecutions in relation to illegal fishsales. It is understood, however, thatQBFP believe that a major impediment toaddressing the issue lies with currentlegislation, which greatly curtails powers ofentry of fisheries inspectors to premiseswhich routinely trade in seafood."

How can you reconcile those two statements?Mr PALASZCZUK: I will ask John Pollock

to respond.

Mr POLLOCK: There are two issues withrespect to black marketing. One is the local ordomestic black market of seafood from therecreational catch sector. You are quite right inidentifying an element in that letter that saysthat powers of entry are one issue—I repeat:one issue—that somewhat restrict the boatingpatrol. That is being looked at now as part ofthe review of the Fisheries Act. We intend totake our own counsel on the policy initiativesbehind that and the legislative principles wehave to comply with to try to address that. Wewill be bringing that up to Government whenthe review is completed.

The second element of it is black marketof interstate fish. We have acknowledged thatthere is a problem with things such as abalone


trade through Queensland. The onemechanism we can put in place to addressthat is a national docketing system. We arealso progressing that to be included in thesame legislative review. That initiative has veryfulsome support, I might say, from thesouthern States, because they are veryconcerned about the black market of abalone,particularly in south-east Queensland.

Mr COOPER: Minister, I point out what Ithink must be typographical errors on page 28in the number of fisheries management planscompleted. That is in the line item on page 28.The 1998-99 Actual shows that only one planwas completed, but my records show that thespanner crab, gulf fisheries and freshwatermanagement plans were all completed.Similarly, the line shows that four plans are tobe completed this year, but I am only aware ofthe trawl and the coral reef and subtropicalfinfish management plans. Which is the onethat I have missed?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Let me start by givingthe response this way. The QFMA hascommitted some $800,000 in annualoperational funding to the fisheriesmanagement planning program over the pastfour years. A similar amount has beencommitted for the 1999-2000 year. Theprogram provides for an extensive communityand stakeholder consultation process, whichincludes 10 zonal advisory committees andseven management advisory committees.These committees provide fisheriesmanagement related advice to theQueensland fisheries management board.Over the past four years, the program haspublished and released for public comment 10fishery discussion papers and six draftmanagement plans option papers.

Mr COOPER: Which is the one that saysfour are completed? I only have three.

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will pass it on to JohnPollock.

Mr POLLOCK: I understand from theQFMA that the other plan that was intendedfor completion this year when that was writtenwas the blue swimmer plan.

Mr COOPER: Minister, can you indicate amore definite date for completion of thosemanagement plans? Specifically, though, willyou proceed with the trawl management planin the form originally proposed, or will youadopt the concerns of the Great Barrier ReefMarine Park Authority?

Mr PALASZCZUK: You have certainlyraised an issue that is creating quite a deal ofconcern out there in the community. On the

one hand, we have the Great Barrier ReefMarine Park Authority, together with SenatorRobert Hill, who are trying to impose therecommendations of the Hussey review on theQueensland Government. The QueenslandGovernment has its own east coast trawlmanagement draft plan.

Mr COOPER: You can implement that ifyou wish, can you not?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Yes. However, I do notbelieve that we, as a Government, can reallyget ourselves involved in a fight with theFederal Government because, at the end ofthe day, Federal laws override Queenslandlaws. That is not to say that the QFMA is notworking together with the GBRMPA authorityto try to arrive at a solution to the number ofsticking points in the draft management planthat will be satisfactory to all parties concerned.What I am trying to do, Mr Cooper, is to bringabout an outcome with a consensus from allsides similar to the outcome that we had in theRFA process.

Mr COOPER: Not as bad as that, I hope!Mr PALASZCZUK: That is not to say that,

at the end of the day, the QueenslandGovernment will not introduce its own eastcoast trawl management plan.

Mr COOPER: Please don't let it be likethe RFA.

Mr PALASZCZUK: It is a big win, the RFA.Mr COOPER: What projections has your

department done on the economic andemployment impact of the Great Barrier ReefMarine Park Authority's trawl plan? You musthave done some impact assessment of theeconomic and employment effects, so you cancounter their argument.

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will pass that on toJohn Pollock.

Mr POLLOCK: We actually initiated,about 18 months ago, a broad economicanalysis of the total of the Queenslandcommercial fishing industry. That project isabout two-thirds completed now. We also havedone a little bit of work on the question you areasking—the very specific impact of any wind-back of effort on the trawl fishery. This is beingfed into negotiations, as the Minister said, onthe trawl industry. But I cannot give you anyspecifics.

Mr COOPER: That is okay. But it hasbeen 18 months, and you are two-thirds of theway through.

Mr POLLOCK: That is enabling us tounderstand how the fisheriesoperate—multiple use of endorsements, big


boats, little boats, and so on. That will help usin any future effort to adjust or have buybacksin the industry.

Mr COOPER: Similarly, Minister, what arethe projections that the department has doneon the economic and employment impact thatthe QFMA-developed trawl management planwill have? Have you done the figures and thehomework on that?

Mr PALASZCZUK: In the first instance,the Great Barrier Reef Marine ParkAuthority—to correct a statement you madeearlier—do not have a plan. The QueenslandGovernment, through the QFMA, have a plan.I make that point. In relation to the otherissue—John?

Mr POLLOCK: Minister, I cannot addanything further to that.

Mr COOPER: That is on the QFMA. Youhave the Great Barrier Reef Marine ParkAuthority. Whether or not they have a plan,they have an impact. So I want to know whatthe impact is going to be on our fishingindustry, and a lot of other people would, too.Similarly, with the QFMA-proposed plan, hasthere been an impact assessment ofeconomic and employment factors on thatplan?

Mr POLLOCK: I do not think I can answerthat with facts and figures at this stage, MrCooper, except to say that part of the broad-based economic study will indicate to uswhether we are likely to lose big boats, smallboats, boats that are using multipleendorsements. But I cannot target that at, say,Bowen or Yeppoon or Brisbane to say wherethe boats are going to come from.

Mr COOPER: But on the industry as awhole?

Mr POLLOCK: There will be a reduction ineffort. The industry itself has accepted that.

Mr COOPER: The economic impact,though, on employment and so on?

Mr POLLOCK: There will be an impact.We could probably put the number of unitsthat are actually going to come out of thefishery, because the industry itself, in workingthrough TrawlMAC to develop what you callthe early version of the QFMA plan,acknowledged that a certain level of fishingeffort in the trawl fishery was a good thing totarget at. And that acknowledged that therewould be some boats coming out of the water.So there will be an impact, but I cannotquantify it.

Mr COOPER: I know there will be animpact. What we need is an impact

assessment on what the effect is going to beon the industry.

Mr PALASZCZUK: I would like to suggestto the Committee that we have Mrs RosemaryLea from the QFMA. If I could call on her, I amquite sure that she will be able to satisfy thequestion that you have just asked.

Mr COOPER: Yes.

Mrs LEA: There has not been a detailedeconomic assessment done yet on theproposals in the trawl plan because they stillare proposals. There is, in principle, a positionbeing taken that we will use an independentassessment allocation committee to determinewhat levels of effort units are allocated toindividual fishermen. And until such time asthat committee does the allocation, we cannotdetermine what impact it will have onindividuals, because it will be depending onthe units that they are given. The units theyreceive will be based on the historical fishingpatterns, and we will be monitoring, as theQFMA, all of that work as we go through theprocess.

Up front, the allocation or the capping ofeffort in the fishery will have some minorimpact—and again, that is an assessmentrather than a calculated figure—a minor impacton individuals, but the detailed impact willoccur only when they choose to do anupgrade or a change of vessel. But as I said,we will be monitoring that situation. We willhave people involved from DPI and QFMA,perhaps from the Australian Bureau ofResource Economics, and other expertsworking with us in the next 12 months beforethe allocations are made.

Mr COOPER: I think you have my point,on both the Great Barrier Reef Marine Parkcause and effect and so on and so forth. It isthe industry we are thinking of and the effectson them.

With regard to fisheries output, page 28of the MPS makes reference to the fisheriesmanagement plans completed last year, oneof which was the freshwater fisheriesmanagement plan gazetted in April. That planprovided for the introduction on 17 October ofthe permit system for fishing in stockedimpoundments, with the option of thecollection of a fee to fund fish stockingprograms. I think I saw in a press statementyesterday that that was being put back to July2000, but you might correct me on that. I askthis question on behalf of the Freshwater FishStocking Association, which is supportive ofthe fee. If the fee has been put back, couldyou explain the delay?


Mr PALASZCZUK: With regard to stockimpoundment permits, my understanding isthat the matter is currently with theParliamentary Counsel in order to change theeffective date. We are going to issue permitsthrough Australia Post because this is themost cost-effective way to administer thisprogram, simply because we have over 600post offices scattered throughout Queensland.The post offices need to be geared up to getthemselves ready for the issuing of thesepermits. The time frame we are implementingnow is that the permits will be in operation from1 July 2000.

Mr COOPER: With regard to the meatindustry, pages 7 and 8 of the MPS refer toyour department's work to date and also referto future involvement in the reform of the meatprocessing sector, as well as theimplementation of the meat processingdevelopment initiative. What is themembership of the meat processing taskforce?

Mr PALASZCZUK: This is aninterdepartmental committee—

Mr COOPER: You are the stakeholdingMinister, are you not?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The task force consistsof members of the Department of StateDevelopment, the Department of PrimaryIndustries and the EPA.

Mr COOPER: What measures have beenestablished to ensure the integrity of theprocess under which the businessarrangements of individual abattoirs areassessed when applications for Governmentassistance are considered?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Let us go through theprocess again. In October 1998, theGovernment established the QueenslandMeat Processing Development Initiative which,of course, is the task force you are referring to.It administers a program which has $20m offunding over three years. The scheme isaimed at providing financial assistance forthose industry components who wish toestablish sustainable export oriented or importreplacement value adding activities inQueensland.

The task force has invited expressions ofinterest, with QMPDI assistance, from over 60meat industry organisations and 29expressions of interest have been receivedfrom proponents ranging from small ruralbusinesses to significant regional and urbanmeat processors. The task force membershave worked closely with these firms in order tofinalise formal QMPDI applications, or to

identify opportunities for other Governmentassistance through schemes such as theQueensland Investment DevelopmentScheme and the Queensland TradeAssistance Scheme and through theDepartment of Employment, Training andIndustrial Relations. I am just going throughwhat you know already, Russell.

Mr COOPER: Yes, I know. Whatmeasures have been established—

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will get Miriam Hardyfrom the department, who is on the task force,to give you a response.

Mrs HARDY: As the Minister has said, thetask force comprises members from the DSD,the DPI and the Environmental ProtectionAgency. The task force has worked closely withthe industry to identify opportunities forsustainable development of the industry intothe next century. We are looking to improvevalue adding rather than concentrating on thecommodity product. In addition to the grantsprograms to which the Minister has referred,the task force also administers theQueensland Meat Processing DevelopmentInitiative—QMPDI—and $20m has been setaside for that over the next three years.

As the Minister indicated, the task forcehas approached 60 meat processing operatorsand has received expressions of interest from29 of those. At the moment, the task force hasapproved funding for three final developedcases—one being Darling Downs Bacon for itsredevelopment and additional value adding.Support has recently been announced forSouthern Queensland Exporters Pty Ltd forthe establishment of a sheep fellmongeringplant at Wallangarra, which will involve 20 jobs,and Western Exporters at Charleville tosupport a rendering plant for a sheep and goatabattoir.

Ms NELSON-CARR: On page 18-10 ofthe MPS mention is made of the QueenslandNational Action Plan for Rural Women. Howdoes DPI's involvement with rural women, andin particular women producers, complementthe work of the Office of Women's Policy?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I thank the honourablemember for the question. The Office ofWomen's Policy is responsible forimplementing policies and programs whichreflect the needs of the broader communityand which address the ongoing issues ofgender inequality. The Office of Women'sPolicy examines the situations of womenacross such areas as health, education andtraining, employment, housing and child care.Specifically, the department has set as one ofits priorities the increased participation of


women in decision making in agriculture. Thedepartment comes from the position wherepreviously only 50% of the people in ruralindustries were involved in decision making.We would like to see that figure go up to 100%of the people within our rural communities.

Following a national consultation process,the National Plan for Women in Agricultureand Resource Management was developed.The Queensland plan—a Vision for Change;Women Working for the Future of RuralQueensland—mirrors the key areas of thenational plan. The Queensland plan is a guidefor rural women, community organisations,industries and Government on how to bettersupport women in agriculture and resourcemanagement. It provides best practicestrategies on how to increase rural women'sinvolvement in leadership and thus reduce thebarriers which prevent their participation.

The department works collaboratively withthe Office of Women's Policy in deliveringstrategies to recognise the contributions ofwomen and increase their participation indecision-making roles. The Queensland planhas received support from individual women,from industry groups, from key stakeholderssuch as the Queensland Rural Women'sNetwork and the Queensland CountryWomen's Association, from the AgriculturalIndustry Association and other Governmentdepartments for whom it is relevant.

Looking at the experience of theQueensland Rural Women's Network andconsidering the great work that thatorganisation is doing and the networks it iscreating throughout Queensland, I have greatfaith in the strength of the women in our ruralcommunities. I believe that, over time, the roleof women will be strengthened in agriculture inQueensland.

Mr MUSGROVE: I refer to page 18-12 ofthe 1999-2000 Ministerial Portfolio Statementswhere mention is made of the Positive RuralFutures Conference at Goondiwindi. Minister,why is DPI involved in Positive Rural FuturesConferences, and what outcomes are beingachieved?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The department worksin partnership with the Office of RuralCommunities and the Priority Country AreaProgram to sponsor and deliver the PositiveRural Futures Conference each year. Theseconferences have been held in the past threeyears in such regional centres as ChartersTowers and Biloela, and most recently atGoondiwindi. I would like to inform theCommittee that I was fortunate enough to beinvited to open the conference at Goondiwindi.

The conferences provide an opportunityfor rural communities across the State togather information, seek expert advice, planfuture strategies and projects and network withother communities to learn from theirexperiences in relation to a self-help approach.At the Goondiwindi conference this year, wellover 300 representatives from some 65 ruralcommunities researched and developed theiraction plans for community and economicdevelopment, greater involvement ineducation and strategies for involving youth—which, of course, is very important in our ruralregions. By engaging local government andcommunity groups in economic developmentthrough the conferences, the department isexpanding its network and partnershipsbeyond traditional industry organisations andinvolving a wider range of stakeholders in thefuture development of Queensland's primaryindustries.

The department's rural partnershipcontinues to work with many of these groupsthroughout the year helping them toimplement relevant actions and strategies.Outcomes being achieved by ruralcommunities as a result of the conferenceinclude diversification of local economies,greater focus on new market opportunities,increased use of information technology,better use of community infrastructure, assets,skills, and, of course, improved communitycapacity to manage change.

If I could just add for the benefit of theCommittee, Mr Chairman, that the energy thatI noticed at the conference in Goondiwindi wassuch that I believe the future for primaryindustries in Queensland is very bright. It wasvery pleasing to see the number of youngerpeople who attended the conference but,more importantly, the number of women whowere there. Certainly, there is a changing faceof primary industries in Queensland.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much forthat answer. That is certainly encouragingnews. At page 26 dot point 4 of the 1999-2000 Ministerial Portfolio Statements mentionis made of net fishing in Trinity Inlet. During theMulgrave by-election the Governmentannounced a reduction in net fishing in TrinityInlet. What progress has the Governmentmade on this commitment?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Yes, that was anelection commitment during the Mulgrave by-election. Of course, the election commitmentwas the closure of Trinity Inlet to commercialnet fishing. I can inform the Committee thatnegotiations for the closure are now nearingcompletion. Letters were sent to all net fishing


licence holders providing details of the closureand inviting fishers to participate in anadjustment assistance scheme.

A regulatory impact statement wasreleased for public comment to ensure fullconsultation on this initiative. The Governmenthas considered responses to the regulatoryimpact statement. The fisheries affected are:N1, N2, N6 and N7 licences. The departmentis currently considering applications fromfishers to participate in the adjustmentscheme. The department is considering theremoval of bait nets N6 (bait licence) fromTrinity Inlet and considering ex gratiapayments to be provided to fishers for loss ofthese nets in Trinity Inlet. No final allocation ofex gratia payments has been made. Inclosing, I would like to say that it would beinappropriate of me to comment further untilthe application assessment process iscompleted.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. Iappreciate that. I call the member forGreenslopes.

Mr FENLON: Minister, at the lastparagraph of page 22 of the 1999-2000Ministerial Portfolio Statements mention ismade of the department's involvement ininnovation and value adding to primaryproducts. What is your department's actualcapability in encouraging value adding toprimary products?

Mr PALASZCZUK: At the outset, let mesay that I do not know whether value adding isa term that we should be using; perhaps weshould be using the term "adding value" to ourprimary industries, which would be far morereflective of what is being done with ourprimary industries in Queensland at present.Basically, the department has a dedicated unitthat provides research and technical servicesto enterprises and individuals who wish tobecome involved in adding value. The Centrefor Food Technology provides these supportservices through the food technology servicesoutput in my portfolio. The services availableinclude new product development, processing,technology improvement, interpretation of foodregulatory requirements, the development offood safety plans, food analysis for exportcertification and research into new foodingredients. The services of the centre are wellknown and well used by current and potentialvalue-adding enterprises, with over 1,000clients having used this service, of which over500 are doing so regularly, which means atleast once a year.

Peter Skarshewski, who is the director ofthe unit, is not here. Perhaps Dr Rosemary

Clarkson might be able to detail some of themore exciting developments that haveoccurred at the centre over the past few years.

Dr CLARKSON: I think one of the realfeatures of this service is that any person witha good idea for a new product, particularly apost-harvest product, can give the centre aring and get advice on where to go next. Thatadvice is really complete advice. It may be onspecial ways to design the product to meet theconsumers' needs, it may be whether there isa market for that sort of product, it may be thatthey are working on a product and that theyhave excess waste and they are wanting toknow what to do with the waste. So the serviceis really a complete service. When the producthas been designed, the centre makes surethat the product fits into the quality assurancesystem of the company.

I think it is also important to think aboutfresh products and fresh chilled products.There is huge consumer demand for that. Soincreasing the shelf life of those products andmaking sure that they have packaging that isenvironmentally friendly, attractive and adds tothe product's convenience is also anotherfeature of the work of the centre.

Mr FENLON: Minister, according to page17 dot point 10 of the 1999-2000 MinisterialPortfolio Statements, over the past ninemonths there has been a huge client demandfor Futureprofit. Please explain why DPI isinvolved in this type of training and what havebeen the training outcomes?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The Futureprofitprogram is really successfully developing thecapacity of Queensland farm families toachieve increased profitability andsustainability. The program does this byinvolving family members in flexible learningopportunities that assist family members todevelop and implement strategic planningprocesses in managing their farms andnatural, human, financial and productionsystem resources.

The Queensland program delivers on theDepartment of Primary Industries' keyoutcomes by assisting Queensland farmfamilies to develop more competitive andviable businesses and more sustainableproduction systems. The Department ofPrimary Industries and I as Minister arecommitted to Futureprofit as part of its role indelivering the Government's priorities of skillingQueensland, providing better quality of life andvaluing the environment.

At the individual property level,Futureprofit has achieved considerablesuccess. This is evidenced by the 727


workshops held in 1998-99. Three workshopsin north Queensland with the three river groupsresulted in the group obtaining NaturalHeritage Trust project funding for fencing offand reparation of riparian areas. A combinedFutureprofit beef plan group in central-westQueensland is now self-directed and hasidentified future training to build on theirprevious learnings and skills.

Futureprofit projects in west and south-west Queensland have been combiningcomputer training with resource management,which involves mapping and planning. Farmfamilies have moved from using computers forcash record keeping to using them for makingbetter management practice decisions basedon natural resource capabilities. A survey ofpast Futureprofit participants in southQueensland revealed that 32 properties hadimplemented natural resource managementchanges to the value of over $1.2m. Theworks included weed, pest and nativevegetation management, river/streamimprovements, revegetation, gully stabilisation,earthworks, dam construction, contour banks,waterways, cropping technologies androtations, and control of grazing pressures.

Evaluations indicate that there is morefarm management planning by land-holdersafter attending Futureprofit workshops.Management changes include using climaticdata before planting and cutting hay,diversifying into enterprises such as farmforestry that have less impact on naturalresources and greater financial potential, andchoosing to leave agriculture altogether. Aspecific application that is on at present isDairy 2000, which ensures that every dairyfarmer will have a plan supporting decisions ifand when—or if—deregulation does occur inQueensland.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much forthat, Minister. At this point, I think it might beappropriate to adjourn for a period of 15minutes for morning tea.

Sitting suspended from 10 a.m. to10.17 a.m.

The CHAIRMAN: The hearings ofEstimates Committee G are now resumed.

Mr FENLON: Minister, I refer to page 12dot point 2 of the 1999-2000 MinisterialPortfolio Statements where interstatecertification assurance is mentioned. Thedepartment has been responsible for thedevelopment of the interstate certificationassurance scheme. What have been thebenefits of this scheme?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The interstatecertification assurance or ICA scheme hasbeen developed by the department to provideQueensland producers with an efficient andcost-effective method of certifying that theirproduce meets interstate quarantinerequirements. Queensland businesses cannow be accredited to issue assurancecertificates for the produce they treat.Previously, they had to pay for an inspector tosupervise and issue certificates.

Importing States are prepared to acceptthese assurance certificates because thebusinesses accredited under ICA are regularlyaudited to ensure that they are following theprocedures provided by the ICA scheme.These procedures use quality assuranceprinciples and are based on current bestpractice. They are subject to continuous reviewto include improvements based on research,practical experience and technicaldevelopments.

The ICA scheme has allowed several newquarantine treatments to be introduced thatwere not available under traditionalGovernment certification. These include fieldtreatments and complex treatment systemsthat cannot be supervised by an inspector. Anexample is the bait spraying and inspectiontreatment approved by Victoria this year forfruit flies in citrus.

More than 900 Queensland businessesare currently accredited for one or more of the21 different ICA treatment proceduresavailable. These cover most of the majorinterstate quarantine requirements applying toQueensland produce. Certificates issued underthe ICA scheme are accepted by all AustralianStates. These States have also adopted ICAfor certifying their own produce. This meansthat the same standards for certifying producewill apply to all growers in Australia.

Mr COOPER: Before the break I wasasking about the meat industry task force andits make-up, and I have received thatinformation. I was also asking about theintegrity of that task force and the processunder which the business arrangements ofindividual abattoirs are assessed whenapplications for Government assistance areconsidered. My next question refers to theSouth Burnett cooperative meatworks atMurgon.

Further to the issue of integrity in themeat processing task force, I refer to amember of that task force, Mr Ray Riding, whois said to have a very close association with acompetitor of that plant, Australian MeatHoldings. On Thursday, 30 September, Mr


Riding was accompanied by the joint CEO ofAMH, Mr Don Ferguson, and an accountantfrom that company. It strikes me as passingstrange that these people are taking a veryclose interest in Murgon when we are trying tokeep competition in the industry. Minister, as Ihave said, you are the stakeholding Ministerand you have an interest in the meat industry.You also have an understanding of theintricacies of the meat industry, including theintense competition in the industry. Do youconsider that that incident has verysubstantially compromised the integrity of thetask force?

Mr PALASZCZUK: At the outset, you areright that the Department of Primary Industriesis the lead agency. We have control of the Act.However, we are working in partnership withthe Department of State Development inrelation to the operations of the task force. Iwill now ask Mrs Miriam Hardy to respond toyou in greater detail.

Mrs HARDY: I will take the first point ofyour question first, about the process withinthe task force for identifying the viability ofbusinesses. On processors indicating to thetask force that they have an interest to exploretheir future business development, task forceofficers work closely with the organisation toidentify and develop a business plan and lookat the future changes that could be put inplace in their business operations. It should benoted that South Burnett did not approach thetask force for such assistance, even though ithad been approached, in writing and verbally,to do so.

In relation to the specific instance that yourefer to, Mr Ray Riding is a member of the taskforce and an officer of the Department of StateDevelopment. I am not aware of the detail ofthat visit. I think we should take that matter onnotice and get back to you at a later time.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Could I also suggestthat if you have any evidence of impropriety,please let us know about it. Personally I do notbelieve that Mr Ray Riding being on the taskforce in any way compromises the workings ofthe task force. However, if you have anyevidence, please pass it on.

Mr COOPER: That is not the point. Thepoint is that he visited the plant with the CEOof AMH and an accountant of that company,and AMH is a direct competitor. You know thatwe are trying to keep competition in theindustry. I am saying that that is a funny wayof doing it. I think you will find that that hascompromised the integrity of the task force.

The Government consistently has refusedto release the details of all the assistance

provided under the meat processingdevelopment initiative. Only selectiveannouncements have been released, and wehave talked about KR Darling Downs.However, nothing has been said about thebeef abattoirs. It seems that somearrangements are conveniently regarded ascommercial in confidence and others are not.As I say, we know about KR Darling Downsand others. It has also been revealed by theTransport Minister that AMH has beenprovided with at least some assistance fromthe Queensland Government in the form ofQueensland Rail's construction of a $5.585mrail siding at Dinmore, and good luck to AMHfor getting it. I have no problem as far as AMHis concerned. However, as this is all taxpayers'money, the people have a right to know howall of that $20m has been spent. As you are astakeholding Minister, in the interests of publicknowledge I would like to have a full accountfrom you of all of the spending of that $20m.Would you be in favour of releasing thatinformation?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will allow MiriamHardy to respond and then I will get back toyou.

Mrs HARDY: The QMPDI is a three-yearprogram. It has obviously taken some time forthe task force to work up proposals withmembers of the industry. The companies that Imentioned earlier are the companies that haveendorsed and approved projects at this stage.Many more have a number in developmentbut which have not been considered by theQMPDI assessment committee. In terms ofDDB, there was a public announcement of$1.8m in support for its extension of valueadding at Toowoomba. In relation to the othertwo companies that are referred to, the levelsof support were commercial in confidence.Those are the three companies that haveapproved support under QMPDI.

Mr COOPER: I understand the need forcommercial in confidence. However, it isstrange that some are released and some arenot. We are all nonplussed by that. You saidpreviously that you were taking one of thosequestions on notice?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Yes.

Mr COOPER: I will return to questions onthe fishing industry. I turn to page 28 of theMPS and to the table headed "OutputStatement" for DPI Fisheries. I refer specificallyto the number of units inspected by theQueensland Boating and Fisheries Patrol. Theactual result fell short of the targeted 29,400units by 240 units. This year's target forinspections represents an increase of 600


units, or 2%. On 22 September in the Courier-Mail you announced that on-the-spot fineswould be introduced in March. You claimedthat they would free up Boating and FisheriesPatrol officers to spend more time policingrecreational and commercial fishermen. Why isit that the QBFP did not achieve last year'stargeted number of inspections and why isthere only a paltry 2% increase in the targetednumber of inspections for this year?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The on-the-spot finescame into effect from 1 July this year. I do notthink we have had enough time to assess howwell this scheme is going, but I understand it isgoing pretty well. I will ask Mr John Pollock togive you a more detailed response.

Mr POLLOCK: If I recollect the figures, itwas some 220 out of 29,000.

Mr COOPER: It was 240. Mr POLLOCK: There was a shortfall of

240 our of 29,000. The target is just that—atarget. I would like to see us exceed the targeteach time. I cannot give you an answer as towhy we had a shortfall of 240 boat contactsout of 29,000, except to say that it is a prettysmall proportion. The budget has beenmaintained pretty well at status quo. As youpointed out, there has been a small increaseof 2%. To my knowledge, there has been nosignificant shortfall in any area of boatingpatrol activities. We are still bedding downVMS. It is a little early yet for us to fully realisethe potential that we foreshadowed for VMS.We are still having trouble making sure thatthe reporting systems work. We have hadintermittent reports of battery failure. We had aGEIS positioning problem in August this yearthat was worldwide. It is too early for me togive any report on the savings or reallocationsthat we are going to make as a result of VMS.

Mr COOPER: The QCFO and Sunfish areconcerned. They do not agree that sufficientemphasis is being placed on patrols andtargets. The estimated increase of 2% isregarded as being far too low. I pass that onfor your interest. Minister, page 8 refers to yourdepartment's policy input into reforms toindustry organisational arrangements for thedairy, fisheries, horticulture, sugar and porkindustries. Since the release of the Budget, ithas subsequently been disclosed that theGovernment is to introduce new legislation toremove the statutory levy collecting powers ofthose five organisations. I understand that thisdecision has been based on Crown Lawadvice that the collection of excise is anexclusive responsibility of the FederalGovernment.

On that basis, the collection of a portionof those levies for functions such as cropinsurance, the Banana Industry ProtectionFund, the Bureau of Sugar ExperimentStations and other research is matched dollarfor dollar by the Federal Government. Thiscould also be questionable. Can you assurethe Committee that you will introducealternative funding mechanisms to ensure thatthose extremely important industry services aremaintained and that not one dollar in revenueis lost? Can you give us an idea of what formthat mechanism will take?

Mr PALASZCZUK: This has certainly beenthe subject of quite a deal of mediaspeculation. I am currently consulting withindustry on the proposals for reform of the fivestatutory producer representative bodies. Aconfidential discussion paper has beendistributed to industry for comment and I havereceived considerable feedback from thosebodies and also from their constituent units. Ido not think I can discuss this any further untilthe legislation has been approved by Cabinet.You understand the process.

Mr COOPER: You are aiming to bring itinto the Parliament soon?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I am aiming tointroduce the legislation into the Parliamentsooner rather than later to give those five peakindustry bodies some certainty. Hopefully, thatwill start from early next year.

Mr COOPER: In the DepartmentalOverview on page 1 reference is made to theestablishment of the Agency for Food andFibre Sciences. Page 32 also refers to theestablishment of the Queensland Food andFibre Science Council, which will be chaired byyou. We have spoken about the institutesbefore. Will each of the institute boards thatcurrently set strategic direction for commodityresearch and development be formallyrepresented on that science council?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The answer to that is:no. But in accordance with the policy Let's GetQueensland Moving Again, we are puttingtogether the Agency for Food and FibreSciences. As I mentioned earlier, the person incharge of progressing the agency is DrRosemary Clarkson. We have not reached adecision as to the final make-up of the agency.We will not do that until we have had extensivediscussions with industry groups, the institutesand all other relevant bodies that would beinvolved in this new agency.

Mr COOPER: I suggest you keep thedoor open for those institutes. Would youconfirm to the Committee that under yourrestructure the institute boards will not just


continue to exist but will maintain their currentstrategic roles and responsibilities for resourceallocation and project implementation?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The whole issue of therole of the institute boards is open todiscussion now between Dr RosemaryClarkson, the boards and Dr Joe Baker.

Mr COOPER: I have a sneaking suspicionthat the institutes might be heading for thechop; am I right?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I think you are nofurther from the truth—

Mr COOPER: I am what?

Mr PALASZCZUK: You are a long wayaway from the truth. That is a very falsestatement.

Mr COOPER: That is the impression I amgetting.

Mr PALASZCZUK: The institutes and theirboards have served industry well.

Mr COOPER: I know that.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Under the new Agencyfor Food and Fibre Sciences, we aim toenhance the roles of the institutes.

Mr COOPER: We will see.

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will ask Dr WarrenHoey to add to that.

Dr HOEY: My rule of thumb in helping toset this up is to keep the best of what we haveand improve on areas that we need toimprove. I have been in personal contact withthe institute board chairs and many peoplethroughout industry to ensure that, in makingany changes, we build on that which has beengood and on the significant gains that havebeen made. The institutes have made manygains in recent years, given their young age.

Nevertheless, coming into an agency inone big business group headed by anexecutive director means that their roles willchange slightly. The benefit, as I see, inputting a lot of our R and D resources—and wehave an enormous capacity in that area—intoa large business group is to be able to raiseour profile, to be able to coordinate ourresources, our application of technology andour delivery of services a lot better than wehave in the past. We all know that we can dobetter, and our clients and our mastersdemand that we do better. We believe thatthere are a lot of positives. We are verymindful of the importance of the partnershipsthat those institute boards have offered andthe benefits they have delivered and will beseeking as much as possible to maintain that.

Mr COOPER: In relation to the budget, Imentioned a question on notice. Minister, youdisclosed that the AFFS would have a budgetof $100m sourced from existing departmentalfunctions. Funding for your department hasbeen reduced by $26.6m according to BudgetPaper No. 4, so what will be the impact of thisreallocation of funding and the reducedbudget on each of the institute's budgets andallocations? In other words, are you going tocut the institutes' budgets?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will let Dr WarrenHoey start off the answer.

Dr HOEY: We will manage all of thosechanges within existing budget allocations.

Mr COOPER: The budget will be cut ornot?

Dr HOEY: Not the $26.6m.

Mr COOPER: The institutes, though.

Dr HOEY: We have levied right across theagency an internal productivity dividend, asmall dividend which we used to reallocate tohigh priority activities. So we have levied asmall dividend and we have reallocated thatback to high priority R and D areas.

Mr COOPER: So the budgets will be cut?

Dr HOEY: Only a very small amount and itwill not impact on service delivery or staffnumbers. The formation of the agency and theformation of the council will be done withincurrent allocations. We have planned this very,very carefully. We are not expanding staffnumbers. If anything, we will seek to gainsome efficiencies in our management area inorder that our service delivery is not impactedupon.

Mr COOPER: You have said that therewill not be any reduction in the level of servicesoffered, but can you assure the Committeethat the addition of another two layers ofbureaucracy, that is through the form of theAFFS and the Food and Fibre SciencesCouncil, will not lead to an even greater pushtowards full cost recovery for services toproducers?

Mr PALASZCZUK: In the first instance weare not increasing the level of bureaucracy.

Mr COOPER: That is a matter of opinion.

Mr PALASZCZUK: That is a statement offact.

Mr COOPER: Okay, you have given youranswer. I have asked the question. We willsee. As far as the full cost recovery isconcerned, are you considering levyingproducers to get full cost recovery for provisionof services?


Mr PALASZCZUK: Dr Hoey will respond toyou.

Dr HOEY: This Government is very, verysensitive to the fee for service issue. Anyintentions to raise fees for services needs togo before Cabinet. As part of our plans inestablishing the Agency for Food and FibreSciences and the council, there are no plansas a result of that to increase our fees for anyservices we currently charge for.

Mr COOPER: I refer to the department'sefforts to reposition hoop pine as a premiumproduct—that is page 66 of the MPS—whichrelies heavily on a three-year 25% royaltydiscount in order to compete with otherimported timbers. I understand imported pinecan be landed in Australia for only $350 to$400 per cubic metre compared with returnsfrom $2,000 to $10,000 for native hardwoods.What long-term effect will your Governmentshift from a diversified industry, which includesthe lucrative hardwood industry, or an industrythat is primarily reliant on the highlycompetitive pine market and what sort of effectwill that have on both royalty returns to theGovernment and on the profitability of theQueensland timber industry?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I have with me ournewly appointed Executive Director forForestry, Mr Ron Beck. He was just appointedlast week. I will ask him to respond.

Mr BECK: You may well be aware that wehave made a large commitment to the hooppine industry, initially through royalty reductionsequivalent to 25%, supported by a marketrepositioning program. In the face of sustainedcompetition, both domestic and international,those remedies were actually extended for athree-year period until 2002. The wholestrategy there is to ensure that the proudlegacy, history and tradition that hoop pine hasin Queensland will be maintained into thefuture and it will be retained as a premiumproduct. I am sorry, Minister, I did notunderstand the connection with the hardwoodindustry.

Mr COOPER: The fact that the returns forhardwood when compared with softwood aremuch, much greater. That is the point. Whatwe are looking at here is the effect of royaltiesand returns to Government on the reductionthat you have given. That is okay. We aresaying that it is good, but we want to know theeffect on the Government Budget from thatand also on the profitability of the Queenslandtimber industry knowing that they arecompeting in a very low market compared witha lucrative market in native hardwoods.

Mr BECK: I believe I understand what youare saying now. Let me first assure you thatthe strategies put in place for the hoop pinerepositioning exercise are fully factored intoDPI Forestry's budget. In fact, the strategiesput in place were largely neutral because initself the strategy ensured that the uptake ofhoop pine would be maintained, whereas thealternate strategy—if we did not put thoseremedies in place, it was guaranteed that theuptake would be reduced. The joint strategiesbetween ourselves as grower and industry asvalue adder has essentially underpinned boththe industry profitability and Government'srevenues through the sale of hoop pine. Interms of the connection with hardwoods,essentially they occupy different segments inthe marketplace.

Mr COOPER: They do. I am aware of it. Itis just that there are far greater returnsobviously in the hardwood industry, but I willcome back to that later.

Mr BECK: I could refer, if you wish, tosome of the value adding strategies that areproposed, and it is intended through the RFApackage to support those value addingstrategies. Whilst I have not personally beeninvolved with some of the industrydevelopment components of that—that islargely being managed through theDepartment of State Development—commitment has been made of some $10m tothat strategy and immediately $80,000 hasbeen provided to support a feasibility study fora consortium of millers looking at value addingof hardwood. I believe that is the future for thehardwood industry. If they are going tomaintain a robust presence in the marketplaceinto the future, that is the direction they wereheading and the Government will support it.

Ms NELSON-CARR: On page 12, dotpoint four of the MPS, mention is made of theinnovative use of trained sniffer dogs fordetecting chemical residues. Can you explainwhere this program is up to now?

Mr PALASZCZUK: In the first instance, letme just say that the program is progressingquite successfully. The department is in theprocess now of training up its third sniffer dog.At present we have operating Norm, who isinvolved in chlorine residue, Jess, who is moreinvolved in the wool industry, and the new dogwho is being trained up—I am not too sure ofits name, but it will come back to me before Ifinish the answer.

Let us get back to Norm. He was our initialsniffer dog and he is also our greatest star.With his handler, Greg Horricks, he visitedapproximately 100 livestock properties


throughout Queensland in the past year. Theyhave proved to be an excellent tool foridentifying organochlorine contamination in thefield, having a detection accuracy of 98%. Asecond organochlorine sniffer dog, whosename comes back to me now, Mel, hascommenced training and is expected to befully imprinted by December 1999. It isplanned to have Mel and his handler fully fieldoperational by the end of the year 2000. I metMel when I launched a pet program at a localschool in Brisbane. I mentioned Jess, our woolsniffer dog. She has also been trained fordetecting chemicals in wool. Her future role iscurrently under negotiation with the woolindustry. As a result of these activities,livestock properties are more accurately able toidentify sites requiring management to preventorganochlorine contamination. These traineddogs play a vital innovative role instrengthening Queensland's claims as a clean,green producer of food and fibre. Over thecoming years, the program will developstrategies to broaden producer access to thistechnology.

A total of $420,000 has been allocated tothat program over four years in supporting thegreen initiative of the 1998-99 budget. As MrCooper and all our beef producers wouldknow, in the past detection of OC residues inbeef has threatened our beef export markets.Wool residues will increasingly impede marketaccess. This is a very innovative way that thedepartment is attempting to overcome thoseproblems. The success rate that I haveindicated to the Committee—98% withNorm—is an indication of how successful theprogram is.

Ms NELSON-CARR: What breed of dogare the sniffer dogs?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Poor old Mel—wecannot even determine what sort of breed heis. Norm is a labrador. Jess is a border collie.

Ms NELSON-CARR: On page 35paragraph 3 of the MPS, mention is made ofthe resources that support the beefenterprises. How has the department resolvedthe dispute with the Red Meat AdvisoryCouncil regarding the ownership of theBelmont research station and the BrianPastures research station?

Mr PALASZCZUK: This issue has beenaround for quite some time. Negotiations havebeen proceeding on this issue, with the RedMeat Advisory Council indicating that earlierproposals did not entail sufficient cash transferto RMAC. An agreement in principle has beenreached that will see the retention for beefcattle research of effective and viable areas of

land plus associated infrastructure at both theBrian Pastures and the Belmont researchstations. In the end, RMAC agreed to a totalprice of $4m, which represents at least a$2.5m discount below the likely return if bothproperties were sold as commercial operations.The agreement is yet to be formalised. Wehave Greg Robbins here from our beefinstitute. He has been very involved in thenegotiations. I will pass it onto him now.

Mr ROBBINS: I am the Director of theQueensland Beef Industry Institute, which isbased in Rockhampton. As the Minister said,this has been a long process. I guess theoutcome of it represents a significant exampleof industry working together with Governmentto get a resolution. We now have a situation inwhich the Red Meat Advisory Council hasagreed in principle with a steering committeecomprising industry and Governmentuniversities in Queensland. The agreement inprinciple is yet to be formalised. That will seeownership of the stations transfer to AgforceQueensland. The cattle on both properties willbe sold either to us in the case of BrianPastures or to the CSIRO in the case ofBelmont. We will also have significant fundscoming from the Queensland Department ofPrimary Industries and also from industrythrough the sale of property in Toowoomba. Atthe end of the day when this is finally reallyresolved and we have an agreement, we willsee a good example of a resolution that meetsthe needs of all parties.

Ms NELSON-CARR: On page 12, dotpoint 10, of the MPS, animal welfarestandards are mentioned. The need for new ormodernised legislation for animal welfare hasbeen intimated in the last budget. Can youplease outline the position for the currentbudget?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The department's$645,000 animal welfare program is designedto meet the needs of Queensland into thefuture. The existing Animals Protection Act1925, which has major shortcomings, will bereplaced with a new Animal Care andProtection Act. The new Act will promote theresponsible treatment of animals through aduty of care on all individuals andorganisations who use or interact with animalsfor any purpose. It will impose tougherpenalties for those who are cruel. Thesepenalties will range up to a maximum of$20,000 and/or two years' imprisonment for anindividual and $100,000 for a corporation.These measures will send a strong signal thatcruelty to animals is unacceptable.


Under the proposed legislation,enforcement will be strengthened through theappointment of DPI stock inspectors andveterinarians as welfare inspectors. Theseofficers are situated throughout Queenslandand will provide a greater coverage for welfarethan has been available in the past. As it isimportant to inform people about properwelfare standards, the new Act will also beable to define acceptable standards of animalcare and use. It will also provide a means toensure that these standards are followed.

The department is developing anextensive program for the livestock industriesto give them an understanding of the nationalwelfare standards that will be recognised in thelegislation. I would also like to inform theCommittee that the Department of Primaryindustries is the lead agency for animal welfarein Queensland. We are in the process now ofdrafting this new Animal Care and ProtectionAct to replace the out of date AnimalProtection Act of 1925. The current legislativetimetables indicate that the Bill is likely to beintroduced to the Parliament early next year.We are trying to get it in towards the end ofthis year, but we do not know whether we willbe able to achieve that. It will be early nextyear at the latest. I think that is good news forQueensland.

The CHAIRMAN: It certainly sounds likegood news.

Mr PALASZCZUK: It is good news forNorm, Jess and Mel.

The CHAIRMAN: My question relates topage 17, dot point 8, of the MPS, which notesthe increasing numbers of rural industrydevelopment partnerships. What outcomesare being achieved from the rural industrydevelopment partnerships?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The Department ofPrimary Industries has a strong commitment tothe partnership approach in rural economicdevelopment. Through the rural partnershipinitiative it is helping a wide range of ruralindustry and community groups to build theircapacity to manage change by focusing onfuture diversification and new marketopportunities, a "help them to helpthemselves" approach. Currently there are sixrural partnership officers across the Stateworking directly with 45 groups and providingsupport to many others. Those staff membersfacilitate groups to identify their issues andassets, develop and implement theirstrategies, identify and develop their skills andaccess appropriate expertise. I will askDevinka, Acting Executive Director of RIBS, tocontinue the answer.

Ms WANIGESEKERA: The partnershipproject within the Rural Industry BusinessServices is an important component of whatour group does. Following on from what theMinister has outlined, some of the significantoutcomes being achieved by this groupinclude new market identification and access,new food and fibre product development,cooperative arrangements to ensure supply tonew markets, increased focus on consumertrends and the need to work the paddock toplate, improved risk management throughdiversification—both within agriculture and intoother industries—structural adjustment of non-viable enterprises and industries, better use oftechnology and information in decision makingand more flexible business structures.

As strategies and projects develop, thepartnership officers ensure the groups arelinked with other agencies and stakeholders togain support. The partnership officers are animportant point of contact for rural industriesand communities in terms of the whole-of-Government service delivery. In terms of RuralIndustry Business Services, the partnershipofficers feed into other areas of our group, forinstance, the trade officers. We work withalliances to bring groups together to developtheir skills and determine where they areheaded. The trade officers then take it over tolook at market opportunities.

I would like to give you some examples ofour work in that area. We have worked with thenorth Queensland goat meat producers up innorth Queensland. This group works inpartnership with DPI, DSD and the Burdekin agcollege to promote and develop goat meatproduction. Another good example is theTheodore women's cotton group. This is agroup of cotton farmers' wives who haveformed, with facilitation help from DPI, togather information and provide personaldevelopment training and education programs.In the west region we are working with a groupcalled Agriculture Enterprise Exploration. Thisis a small group of producers who have formeda partnership with officers from within RIBS toinvestigate the possibilities for diversification inthe area of western Queensland.

The CHAIRMAN: Minister, dot point 7 onpage 12 of the MPS states that the concept ofa National Livestock Identification System wasprogressed. The NLIS is considered to be animportant industry/Government initiative inrelation to food safety. What action is thedepartment taking to facilitate theimplementation of this scheme?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I think the honourablemember has basically identified the fact that


this initiative is industry driven and it is gettingthe full support of Government. I think that is avery important point to make. As part of thatindustry initiative, the Beef IndustryDevelopment Advisory Council, or BIDAC as itis more commonly referred to, and the Animaland Plant Health Service of the DPI have beenjointly coordinating the introduction of the NLISin Queensland through a consultative andeducational process. It is planned to have theNLIS operational in Queensland quite shortlyto cater for new cattle identificationrequirements associated with export markets,particularly the European Union, wheretraceability of product has become ofparamount importance.

A consultative group of stakeholders,together with an implementation committeeunder BIDAC, has been developing and areimplementing strategies for a roll-out of thescheme later on this year. $30,000 in newinitiative funding has been contributed by thedepartment to a joint study with the processingindustry on NLIS systems development issues,in particular data collection and feedback formanagement and Government purposes.

The implementation of this scheme hasresulted largely from decisions taken by whatwas the residues management group and isnow known as Safemeat. It is a nationalindustry initiative facilitated by the State andCommonwealth Governments. Animal andproduct traceability under current systems hasbeen found to be inadequate for modernmarket demands.

The CHAIRMAN: On page 17, at dot point4 of the MPS you mention aligning the RIBSservices with the needs of industry sectors bydeveloping partnerships and networks ofclients. How does the DPI call centre contributeto the priorities of the Government and at thesame time service the primary industries sectorof Queensland?

Mr PALASZCZUK: This service providesmore jobs for Queenslanders and at the sametime contributes to the Government's priority ofskilling Queensland as the Smart State, whilealso providing a toll free call guarantee fromanywhere in Queensland. The DPI call centre,which was launched on 1 July 1997, hasalready received more than 140,000 calls. Iremember quite vividly being there in the callcentre to take the 100,000th phone call from aproducer in, I think, the Lockyer Valley. Thiscall centre has now received more than140,000 calls, with the maximum daily call ratebeing 440. Eighty-two per cent of all calls areanswered by the DPI call centre within 30seconds, with the average speed of call

answer being 15 seconds. To further report onthis great initiative of the department, I will askMr Graham Dawson to continue.

Mr DAWSON: The DPI call centre is afinalist in the Premier's Awards this year forservice to rural and regional Queensland. TheDPI call centre was named Australia's best callcentre of any size in customer service deliveryin 1998. It was also one of three finalists in thecategory in the State awards earlier this year.

The DPI call centre also providesinformation services to the Department ofMines and Energy. Thus, we are ensuring thatthe high standards already attained by oneGovernment agency are utilised by another.This also enables people in rural and remoteareas of the State to access Governmentinformation at a time that suits them, thecustomer.

DPI is negotiating to extend its call centreservices to other Government departmentsand is having discussions with theEnvironmental Protection Agency aboutproviding a similar arrangement to that it haswith DME, which is a fee for servicearrangement. DPI is also discussing with theDepartment of Natural Resources how the twoagencies, which have common clients, mightcombine to provide an information servicewhich is called a cluster call centre. Thiscapitalises on the work already done by DPIand might well lead to savings to the taxpayerby not doubling up on the purchase ofexpensive information technology.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Basically what we aresaying is that it is a very successful service.The department is very proud of its service andwe are looking at extending its use to otheragencies within Government.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. Itcertainly sounds very impressive. I now call themember for Crows Nest.

Mr COOPER: Further to my question onnotice No. 5 regarding the Government'sproposed south-east Queensland regionalforest agreement, which will gradually closedown the hardwood industry, I understand thatthe Government will be purchasing Boral'stimber operations to shut the Nandroya sawmilland the Cooroy board plant, shedding at least80 jobs. Boral recently signed a $13.5m jointventure agreement with Forestry Tasmaniaand a consortium of Japanese investors tocreate 7,500 hectares of new hardwoodplantation estates in Tasmania over the next15 years. What steps have you taken toensure that Queensland taxpayers' moneyused to shut down Boral's Queensland


operations will be invested in this State ratherthan in Tasmania?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I start by reinforcingthe fact that on 16 September this year theQueensland Government, the timber industryand conservationists signed an historicagreement to protect jobs, regionalcommunities and Crown native forests insouth-east Queensland—I think we all knowthe other benefits that this agreement willdeliver—which basically means continuation ofnative forest harvesting by existing mills at theircurrent volumes for the next 25 years. That, ofcourse, is with the exception, as thehonourable member has said, of Boral's millnear Cooroy. It will also include Finlayson's millat Yarraman and the Hyne and Sons mill atDingo.

Detailed resource modelling confirms thatadequate timber is available over the next 25years to support the plan. Over 471 new jobsin the region will be created to offset the 80potential job losses in Noosa's immediatehinterland. I believe that this will be a seamlesstransition over 25 years to a hardwood industrybased on plantations, supported by acomprehensive R and D program.

In this regard it is interesting to note thatthe Commonwealth Government recentlyreleased a paper titled Opportunities forHardwood Plantation Development in South-east Queensland that fully supports thefeasibility of the 25-year plantation strategy. Iwill now ask Mr Ron Beck to further add to myanswer.

Mr BECK: From my discussions with themanager of the Timber Board, I think it wasaccepted by the Timber Board that if therewere going to be reductions in the availabilityof timber in any outcome it would have put injeopardy the whole industry. The strategy wasobviously supported by Boral to move out ofthe industry.

Mr COOPER: It would. Take the moneyand run!

Mr BECK: Obviously, that was acommercial decision by Boral. What it diddeliver was the ongoing security of theremaining members of the industry, as theMinister has outlined there, for 25 years. Ibelieve that is in the overall benefit of both theindustry and the community.

Mr COOPER: That is a matter of opinion.Obviously, we do not support the proposals ofthe Queensland Timber Board, either. Butback to the question. We mentioned theshedding of at least 80 jobs as a result of thatand the $13.5m joint venture that Boral have

entered into with Tasmania. So what I amsaying is that, as far as the Queenslandtaxpayer is concerned, what steps are youtaking to ensure that we do not see repeats ofBoral, for instance, taking off to Tasmania? Ifwe are going to have some payouts, which weare seeing, perhaps that money could bespent—or guaranteed to be spent—inQueensland, rather than just: take the moneyand run. What initiatives do you have toensure that those funds are going to stayhere? We talk about employment. I know wehave heard it all before, whether it be in northQueensland, Wide Bay, Maryborough andthose places, where they have turned theminto three-fingered waiters, and catchingbutterflies, and all of that. Of course, it did notwork; it did not happen. We can see the samething happening here again. What I am askingis: are there any constructive, concrete ideasand initiatives in order to keep those fundshere in the State and actually do somethinguseful with them?

Mr PALASZCZUK: On the issue ofemployment, the honourable membermentioned a loss of 80 jobs, but there will bean additional 471 new jobs proposed in privatesector softwood milling and value adding, 241jobs at the MDF plant at Gympie, 30 jobs inplantation and management and 100 jobs inconservation management, as well.

In the plantation development area, weare embarking on the plantation of 10 milliontrees over five years as part of an $18msoftwood and hardwood plantation programand the establishment of a hardwood timberresearch and extension program. We havealso put together an incentives package toencourage new investment in hardwood valueadding. In this regard, it is interesting to notethat the Government has already committed$80,000 to support a value adding feasibilitystudy involving a number of mills. Investmentis already starting to flow based on the securityprovided by the Government's plan—and"security" is the operative word. The security isthere now for 25 years.

On the conservation side, we have animmediate addition of 425,000 hectares todouble the State's conservation estate. Insupport of the agreement, the QueenslandGovernment has committed in excess of $80mover the next four years to ensure that this isgoing to happen.

Mr COOPER: Minister, further on that andyour Government's proposed RFA, which isreferred to on page 66, you would be aware ofthe Australian forest standard currently beingdeveloped by the Ministerial Council on Forest,


Fisheries and Agriculture in response togrowing international demands for sustainabletimber production and the increasingly difficultaccess to some markets on that basis. Underyour plan, hardwood sawmillers will now drawtheir existing wood entitlements from only100,000 hectares—remember that 425,000extra have been taken out—and plantationswill be established after that, or during the next25 years, and pigs might fly. Nevertheless, areyou satisfied, Minister, that the intensity of thatlobbying activity will enable those millers tosatisfy the sustainability criteria of theAustralian forestry standard and to be able tosell their timber into the future—coming off100,000 hectares of stuff that has alreadybeen cut out, anyway?

Mr PALASZCZUK: At the outset, let mejust say that the Timber Board would not havesigned the agreement unless they wereconfident that they would be able to have acontinuity of supply. In relation to yourcomment about "pigs might fly"—when theGovernment is committed to a very intensiveplantation regime of both hardwood andsoftwood timbers, I believe that the target setby the Government is very achievable and, atthe end of the day, I believe that we will havea sustainable timber industry in Queensland.

Mr COOPER: Native hardwoods—whereare these plantations going to be?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will get to that. Weare going to maintain a sustainable timberindustry in Queensland. In relation to theresearch program for hardwood plantationsand areas identified for hardwood plantations,I will ask Mr Ron Beck, Executive Director ofForestry for our department, to respond tothat.

Mr BECK: An interdepartmental groupinvolving DPI, State Development and DNRhas been set up to deliver on this plantationdevelopment strategy. The areas that we arelooking at specifically in terms of your questionthere, Mr Cooper—

Mr COOPER: Plantations and where theyare going to be?

Mr BECK: Yes. Coincidentally, virtuallyidentical with what was identified in that studyreferred to by the Minister, called Opportunitiesfor Hardwood Plantation Development inSouth East Queensland, which was releasedin September 1999—only a couple weeksago—by the Bureau of Rural Sciences and theAustralian Bureau of Agricultural andResource Economics, what they identifiedthere were three primary subregions:Bundaberg/Gladstone, Gympie and Brisbane.Just to complete what was said there—at the

end of their summary they said, "Expansion ofsoftwood plantations and the development ofhardwood plantations are both feasible in theGympie and Brisbane subregions"—obviously,they are the southern subregions—"whereasthere are opportunities for a new plantationindustry based on hardwoods in theBundaberg and Gladstone subregion.

Mr COOPER: That gives us a clue. Butwhat area in hectares? Because 425,000hectares have been taken out, are we putting400,000-odd back, or is it just 10,000 orsomething like that?

Mr BECK: What the Government hasidentified to date, in terms of the Governmentplan, is that 10,000 trees will be established—

Mr COOPER: 10 million, I think.Mr BECK: 10 million.

Mr COOPER: That is over 10,000hectares, I think.

Mr BECK: It is indeed, if you work onsomething like 1,000 trees per hectare.

Mr COOPER: When 425,000 hectaresare being taken out, and with 10,000 hectaresreplacing that, you have to be a little bitsceptical. Minister, firstly, at the Estimateshearings on Friday relating to yourcolleague—and further to your reply to myquestion on notice No. 5—the Minister forNatural Resources referred to the addition of425,000 hectares of Crown native forest toreserve. He also stated that it is likely that alarge proportion of that area will be designatedto national park at some time in the future.They contain a lot of grazing leases. So howwill those leases be affected by the decision?What will be the impact and viability of thoseleaseholders? And what programs will yourGovernment be undertaking to maintain theirviability?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I would like to answerthat question, but I think that is a matter forthe Minister for Natural Resources todetermine.

Mr COOPER: We are not going to get ananswer from him. I thought you might be a bitbetter than that.

Mr PALASZCZUK: I will have a yarn toyou in private.

Mr COOPER: I am sure you will. Minister,I just want to go back to some of the otherareas that we developed before. I wasconcerned about the DPI's primary role inanimal and plant health, pest and diseasesurveillance and control, and maintenance andexpansion of export market access. You havecertainly been doing a lot of travelling and


good work in that regard. I refer to page 11 ofthe MPS and the extremely competitiveinternational market. As you know, we havetalked about the clean and green status, all ofwhich we support. I acknowledge that thepapaya fruit fly eradication campaign has beenwound down; and acknowledging that you didnot do so well out of the Budget, however, inthis area, why has some $9m been cut fromthe APHS budget?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I have here Mr KevinDunn, who is the executive director of thatarea. I will ask him to respond, and then Imight add a few points later.

Mr DUNN: The APHS budget, as it isreflected in the MPS referred to by Mr Cooper,mostly reflects the wind-down in the papayafruit fly program. The 1998-99 budget figure,as stated in the document, was not requiredbecause of the success of the program in thatyear. The actual budget referred to and usedin that program was $40,880,000. Acomparison of the actual for 1998-99 with theestimate for 1999-2000 reflects a difference ofapproximately $5m.

Just taking the line items of those twocomparisons of columns, the first line refers topayments for outputs. This mainly relates tothe reduction in the papaya fruit fly programbecause of the success of the program. Therewill be minimal activity in that area in 1999-2000; in fact, there is just a small amount nowbeing used to basically write off the program.

The next line refers to user charges. Thedifferences which are reflected there show thereduction in revenues receipted from otherState Governments and from theCommonwealth Government due to thewinding up of the program. Mr Cooper willrecall that this was a national program and thatthere was national funding from theCommonwealth and each of the States. Thatparticular figure reflects the reduction inrevenues from those sources.

The next line refers to grants andcontributions. This indicates the reduction inthe anticipated number of incidents occurringunder the Tuberculosis Freedom Assuranceprogram. That is the main reason for thereduction there. This program is basically theongoing monitoring of bovine tuberculosissince the declaration of eradication inAustralia. There is expected to be a very smallnumber of sporadic single cases in the five or10 years subsequent to the declaration oferadication, and that is principally fundedthrough that particular appropriation.

Other revenues are basically similaracross the two columns. This shows the

accounts from the Banana Industry ProtectionBoard which appear wholly with in the APHSbudget this year, whereas previously theyappeared jointly in the APHS and theAgriculture Industry Development budgets.

Mr COOPER: Thank you. Our clean,green status is so important and I would havethought that our disease control andsurveillance should at least have beenmaintained, or even boosted, if we are goingto put our money where our mouth is, so tospeak. This raises concerns with me that thesebudget cuts might force the DPI intocontinuing to pursue the introduction of fullcost recovery for services to producers onissues such as tick clearance. As you will beaware, Minister, that is a current hot topic. Thismay force the DPI to continue to impose costson people using tick clearance facilities.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Before I come to that:you made an assertion that funding forsurveillance has been reduced in theDepartment of Primary Industries. That is notquite true.

Mr COOPER: Again, we will agree todisagree.

Mr PALASZCZUK: The 1998-99 figurewas $8,724,000. The 1999-2000 is$8,954,000. So there is an increase there. Ican assure the Committee that there will be noreduction in services in that area.

Mr COOPER: Reduction in money but notin services.

Mr PALASZCZUK: The next question youasked was in relation to cattle tick clearancesand overtime payments?

Mr COOPER: That is right.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Unfortunately, despiteextensive consultation I cannot get anyindustry agreement regarding the provision ofweekend tick clearance services.

Mr COOPER: You will still charge them.Mr PALASZCZUK: There seems to be a

differing body of opinion.

Mr COOPER: The people who do not usethe facilities do not care. The people who usethe facilities do care. That is why you will notget agreement.

Mr PALASZCZUK: That is not true.Mr COOPER: It is.

Mr PALASZCZUK: We have undertakensome research and we have held meetingsthroughout the State in relation to this matter,and that is not true at all. Industry views rangefrom the opinion that all services should beprovided free by the Government to the view


that services should be provided mainly on acost recovery basis. This has basically left theGovernment in the very difficult position whereany decision will meet with opposition fromsome sectors of industry. You will understandthat. Therefore, with this background, I plan tomake a decision that is in the best long-terminterests of the industry and the Queenslandcommunity, and this basically includes placingpriorities on activities, such as animal healthsurveillance to support market access andanimal welfare—which is what you askedbefore—and less emphasis on endemicdisease control, such as cattle ticks. Before Ican announce a decision I will have to take itto Government.

Mr COOPER: And, as you say, with fullconsultation. What concerns me is that thepeople on the tick line, as we know it, are thepeople who hold the line against all the rest.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Yes.

Mr COOPER: They are the ones whoprotect the clean areas, and they are the oneswho pay and cop it in the neck. They are alsothe ones who are involved in the live cattleexports. They like to use those facilities. Youdo not do it only between the hours of 9 and 5on Mondays to Fridays. It is on seven days, 24hours a day. You pay overtime in the areas ofboating and fisheries. The same should bedone with regard to stock inspectors, sevendays a week. This will allow for continuity inservice. We have talked about this matterbefore. Please understand that those on theline are the ones who cop it and who have topay. Therefore, I do not think that they shouldbe in the gun. That is the point I make.

With regard to Animal and Plant HealthServices, which is referred to on page 11 ofthe MPS, reference is made to DPI'sinvolvement in eradicating the recentNewcastle disease outbreaks in New SouthWales. I do not see any reference in thebudget to the costs incurred by yourdepartment. They were certainly costlyoutbreaks, as we all know. I need to know thecost of sending departmental staff to thoseoutbreaks. Can you inform the Committee ofthe costs incurred by Queensland in relation tocleaning up these outbreaks under theNational Cost Sharing Agreement? Has theGovernment considered transferring thefunding responsibilities for such outbreaks toTreasury rather than you people having to payfor it?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I wish it was true.

Mr COOPER: Have you considered it?

Obviously Treasury should be paying. Yourbudget should not be affected by somethingthat occurs from time to time.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Point taken. During thepast 12 months, eradication of the seriouspoultry disease, Newcastle disease, has beenattempted near Sydney at St Mary's andSchofields and near Gosford—more commonlyreferred to as Mangrove Mountain. It isbelieved that all three outbreaks involved asimilar virus. The virus has mutated from anexisting non-virulent Newcastle disease viruscirculating in poultry flocks, rather than havingbeen introduced from overseas.

This represents the largest animal diseaseemergency response in Australian history, withover 2 million birds destroyed, and has costGovernments in excess of $20m. Queenslandhas contributed 9% of all costs involved, aswell as a large number of trained staff such asveterinarians, inspectors and scientists. Iffuture outbreaks occur, the stamp-outapproach used to date will be modified to allowlower-cost options, such as high temperatureprocessing of birds and vaccination, to beused. To get to the specifics, I will ask MrKevin Dunn to continue.

Mr DUNN: Mr Cooper, there has been aprogressive invoicing of the National CostSharing Agreement in relation to this matterfrom the New South Wales Government. Atthis stage, all the costs for that outbreak havenot yet been invoiced. As the Minister hassaid, the estimated cost overall of theNewcastle disease outbreak in the financialyear 1998-99 is approximately $20m, of whichQueensland has a 9% share. At this stage,Queensland has already paid several hundredthousand dollars of that component and hasidentified a figure of $843,000 in theallocations for 1999-2000 to continue thosepayments as advice is progressively receivedfrom New South Wales. This has been anationally cost-shared exercise, that is, theCommonwealth is funding 50% of the exerciseand the States collectively fund the other 50%,of which in toto Queensland pays 9%.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Icall the member for Greenslopes.

Mr FENLON: Minister, at page 31, dotpoint 13, of the Ministerial PortfolioStatements, you mention the appointment ofa chief scientist to reinforce research,development and extension investment andadvance Queensland's animal and plantproduct industries. Minister, what has the DPIdone to reinforce research, development andextension investment and advance


Queensland's animal and plant productissues?

Mr PALASZCZUK: Before I get to thatanswer, in relation to the 425,000 hectaresthat are going to be taken into reserve as aresult of the RFA agreement, the honourablemember for Crows Nest took a cheap shot. Ineed to point out to the Committee that only asmall percentage of that 425,000 hectares isactually being logged. So if you take intoaccount a 10,000 hectare plantation regimewhere all the timber there will be logged, youcannot really make the comparison betweenthe 425,000 hectares reserve and the 10,000hectare plantation reserve. I just thought that Ihad better make that point.

Mr COOPER: Can I make a quickresponse?

The CHAIRMAN: Yes.Mr PALASZCZUK: That is fine.

Mr COOPER: It was not a cheap shot.The 425,000 actually is coming out; it is justthe 10,000 hectares. As we have said, thesmaller timber towns are going to have totravel a very, very big distance to reach thosewhereas they have access to it right now, orthey did have. That is the point that I make:the distance will be a killer for them.

Mr PALASZCZUK: I think that you will findthat there is agreement among all the partiesthat this is the best outcome possible for thetimber industry in Queensland.

Mr COOPER: Again, I cannot agree withyou.

Mr PALASZCZUK: Okay. I rememberwhat the question was. In accord with thepolicy, "Let's get Queensland moving again—Labor's commitment to primary industries", thedepartment created the position of chiefscientist. Of course, as I have informed theCommittee previously, we have appointed DrJoe Baker to that position. Currently, theQueensland Food and Fibre Science andInnovation Council is being established and willbe the Queensland Government's principalsource of advice on issues in science andinnovation in food and fibre. The role of thecouncil will be to ensure that innovations infood and fibre are highlighted and promotedfor the benefit of all Queenslanders. Thecouncil will advise the Government on strategicpriorities and facilitate alliances with researchorganisations in Australia and overseas. It willalso ensure that the Government's investmentdelivers the right mix of social, economic andenvironmental outcomes for Queensland.

The membership of the council will bringtogether the best in Queensland food and

fibre science technology and innovation. It willinclude eminent scientists, industry andcommunity representatives. Dr Joe Baker, thedepartment's chief scientist, will be theexecutive chairman of this council. I believethat the establishment of this council willcertainly give our department, the QueenslandGovernment and Queenslanders in particularthat much-needed shot in the arm to really getour primary industries moving.

Mr FENLON: According to page 11, dotpoint 16, of the 1999-2000 Ministerial PortfolioStatements, Northwatch activities havecommenced. Minister, can you outline whatsuccesses have been achieved as a result ofthe funding provided for the Northwatchprogram?

Mr PALASZCZUK: For those memberswho are not aware, I inform the Committeethat the Northwatch program is a Departmentof Primary Industries initiative to increasesurveillance for pests and diseases in plantsand animals and improve outbreak responsein remote areas of Cape York and TorresStrait. In 1998-99, the budget was $1.07m,and $1.2m is planned for the 1999-2000 year.

The Northwatch project is now fullyoperational with staff based at Cairns,Townsville, Coen, Normanton and Mareeba.The only centre that I have not visited yet isNormanton. I must get there. An operationalplan has been developed in consultation withindustry and community representatives andendorsed by the Department of PrimaryIndustries. All staff have undertaken cross-cultural training to equip them for work with theCape York and Torres Strait communities. TheCoen information and inspection centre nowoperates up to 16 hours a day throughout theyear at a cost of $400,000 a year. Just a fewmonths ago, I was fortunate enough to havethe privilege of opening that centre.

In 1998-99, 8,821 vehicles, 1,166animals, and 7,418 kilograms of fruit wereinspected. In 1998-99, AQIS contributed$100,000 to the operation of the centre andwill repeat this contribution for this year. Theseactivities have enhanced awareness amongtravellers and local residents and provideadditional security against the spread of pestsand diseases. Northwatch surveillance has ledto detections of cotton rust at Cooktown,tomato leaf curl virus on Cape York Peninsulaand spiralling white fly in Cairns and Townsville.In March 1999, Northwatch staff successfullyeradicated banana black Sigatoka at Bamagaand subsequently on Thursday Island. Theyalso control papaya fruit fly in the Torres StraitIslands using an intensive blocking program


similar to that used successfully in the earlierCairns outbreak. Before I close, I would like topay tribute to Neil Sing, who was in charge ofthe Northwatch program. I think that he is inanother position of the department. He reallyled that program really well and a lot of oursuccess is due to his hard work.

Mr FENLON: Minister, at the last dot pointon page 7 of the 1999-2000 MinisterialPortfolio Statements mention is made ofsustainable development, including vegetationand water management. Minister, sincefarmers are the biggest users of naturalresources, what is the department going to doto ensure that there is no further degradationof our natural resource base?

Mr PALASZCZUK: I thank the honourablemember for the question. This is a very, veryimportant issue. Our Government is committedto ecologically sustainable development andour Government takes that commitmentseriously. ESD does not stifle development butensures that it is in harmony with our naturalenvironment, benefits the whole community,and stays within socially acceptable levels. Thedepartment has a major role to play indeveloping farming systems that fit within theESD framework and then working with farmersto encourage their adoption as normal farmmanagement practices.

The department's research anddevelopment work in agriculture, forestry andland use integrates environmentally friendlyand socially acceptable elements along withthose relating to economic viability. Codes ofpractices have been developed for manyindustries in sugar, horticulture, forestry andrangelands management and more are beingdeveloped. Peter Neville, would you like to addto those comments?

Mr NEVILLE: The important emphasisthat we are placing on this as a department isto attempt to get the balance right betweenprotection and conservation and, obviously,production. To do that, we need to work fairlyclosely with industry and we are doing that byassisting with codes of practice and developingthose codes with industry to try tooperationalise what is a generic concept ofESD—ecologically sustainable development—into how that gets applied within industries.

An important element of that isattempting to quantify the economic costs thatsometimes impose on production systems foran overall community benefit. That is wherethe department has a particular role to play inworking with industries and across otherdepartments—the Environmental ProtectionAgency and the Department of Natural

Resources—to attempt to get that balanceright. So that has been our main focus in tryingto operationalise ESD and sustainableagriculture practices.

Ms NELSON-CARR: On page 45,paragraph 1, of the MPS I note yourdepartment's contribution to the growth anddevelopment of Queensland's diversehorticultural industry, including the ornamentalindustry. With the increased focus on food andfibre and the formation of the Agency for Foodand Fibre Sciences, what assistance will yourdepartment continue to provide to theQueensland nursery and associatedindustries?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The department hasnot forgotten the importance of the amenity inenvironmental horticulture, which is made ofthe following peak bodies: the QueenslandNursery Industry Association, the QueenslandFlower Growers Association, the QueenslandAssociation of Landscape Industries, the Parkand Leisure Association and the turf industry.The value to Queensland of this rapidlyexpanding sector is approximately $480m, withover 13,000 people directly employed.

The department has just completed themost extensive survey ever conducted toidentify the current impediments limitingQueensland nursery exports. A series of step-by-step guides to help first-time businessesexport live plants is due to be launched shortly.To further support this initiative, thedepartment has also significantly expanded itsinformation service to the nursery industry andhas undertaken an export ready scheme toimprove the capacity of industry to rapidlyrespond to export opportunities. I will ask DrKen Jackson to add to my answer.

Dr JACKSON: The institute services theamenity industry from our Redlands researchstation. The department has recentlyundertaken a partnership agreement with theQueensland Flower Growers Association,QFGA, to establish a full-time executive officefor the association. This strategy aims toprovide appropriate whole-of-industry supportto Queensland to improve the long-termsustainability and coordination of their peakbody. Since this initiative was undertaken, inthe last six months QFGA membership hasmore than doubled.

The DPI at the Redlands research stationis also assisting Queensland nursery industriesin the export of live plant product byundertaking hundreds of pest and pathogentests of export product and maintainingconstant nursery inspections to ensuresustainable export markets. Also, there is no


dedicated turf research facility in Australianorth of Melbourne at this time. To addressthis deficiency, the DPI's QueenslandHorticulture Institute has investedapproximately $200,000 to set up a turfresearch group within the Amenity andEnvironmental Horticulture program atRedlands. The potential to export newsubtropical grass species that are either salt orshade tolerant to Asia and the Middle Eastcountries has enormous potential.

Ms NELSON-CARR: Page 42, paragraph5, of the MPS indicates that a major pest tofield crops and horticulture in Queensland isheliothis. What is the department doing tocombat this pest?

Mr PALASZCZUK: The Department ofPrimary Industries has increased the researchdevelopment and extension effort towardsimproved management of heliothis inresponse to the problems encountered by cropproducers in Queensland with very positiveoutcomes to date, including new staffappointments. The Queensland Government'sinitiative Supporting GreenIndustries—Combating Heliothis has injected$2.38m over four years to expand theresearch effort. New funding linkages exist withindustry research and developmentcorporations. Parts of the new initiative includea novel options unit, a chemical ecology unit, abiopesticides unit and a field ecology unit withlinkages with the University of Queensland, theUniversity of New England, CSIRO and NewSouth Wales agriculture.

Community pest management programsarea wide or regional management strategieshave been introduced into several cropproducing districts in Queensland. They havebeen successful in reducing insecticidedependence for heliothis management. I thinkthis can be best demonstrated by what ishappening in the Emerald district, where allcotton growers took part in the DPI program toput in some crop trapping. I will not explain it tothe committee because I do not have enoughtime. However, that program has worked and ithas really reduced the amount of chemicalsthat the producers had to use to combat theheliothis. This is part of the development andextension of activities that have really helpedto increase industry awareness of the issuessurrounding heliothis management, withparticular emphasis on pest biology andecology.

Ms NELSON-CARR: I turn to page 66,paragraph 8, of the MPS where plans for theworldwide commercialisation of the wollemipine are mentioned. How will the joint DPI

Forestry and Birkdale Nursery wollemi pineproject impact on Queensland's exports?

Mr PALASZCZUK: This is a very excitingproject that has been put together by theDepartment of Primary Industries incollaboration with the Birkdale Nursery. BeforeI give the Committee a detailed response, Iwould like to add a point of clarification aboutthe Operating Statement on page 57. MrCooper referred to that at the beginning of thedebate and compared it to the OutputSummary on page 5. I reassure theCommittee that both totals are correct. Thedifference is that the amounts disclosed in theOperating Statement include that portion ofthe Corporate Services Agency costs. TheCSA provides corporate services to the DPI, aswell as the Department of Natural Resources,under a service level agreement. The costsrelating to DNR service delivery have beenexcluded from the Output Summary on page5, as the figures disclosed on page 5represent costs associated with the delivery ofthe Department of Primary Industries outputs.Therefore, they are rightly excluded as CSAcosts associated with the delivery of service tothe Department of Natural Resources.

In 1997, the Royal Botanic Gardenscalled for expressions of interest in the rights tocommercialise wollemi pine worldwide. Thedepartment's forestry branch and the BirkdaleNursery provided a joint proposal that theRoyal Botanic Gardens accepted in late 1998.This proposal provides for the Department ofPrimary Industries Forestry and the BirkdaleNursery to gain exclusive rights tocommercialise the wollemi pine worldwide for aperiod of around 15 years. The success of thisproject represents a notable example ofcooperation between the QueenslandGovernment, through the Department ofPrimary Industries, and local industry andpromises to generate in the order of $15m perannum in export earnings commencing aroundabout the Year 2006. Not only will this projectgenerate valuable export earnings, it will alsocreate local employment and generateinternational recognition for Queensland's rolein the conservation of this rare andendangered species. The wollemi pine is anear relation to Queensland's hoop pine. It is arare primitive tree discovered in 1994, 150kilometres north-west of Sydney. That is asclose as we will get, because the location is stilla closely guarded secret.

At the end of the day, this means that ourresearchers within the Forestry branch of theDepartment of Primary Industries are as goodif not better than researchers anywhere else inthe world. What they have done with the


wollemi pine is world-first research. With thatexpertise, I am quite sure that when ourresearchers continue their work into developingnew hybrids for the hardwood plantationindustry, their research into the wollemi pineand into producing hybrids in the softwoodplantation area will serve them well. That iswhy I have all the confidence in the world thatwe will be able to achieve our target ofsuccessfully growing hardwood plantationswithin 25 years.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much,Minister, for that very informative answer. Onpage 17, paragraph 1, of the MPS mention ismade of RIBS close links with the privatesector companies in export and infrastructurein national and international supply chains.What is the current trade situation in regard toQueensland's trading partners affected by theso-called Asian financial crisis?

Mr PALASZCZUK: You have asked a verydetailed question. I might ask DevinkaWanigesekera to respond.

Ms WANIGESEKERA: An analysis ofQueensland's top trading partners in 1997-98reveals that Japan, South Korea and Taiwan,representing the north Asian segment, andIndonesia and Malaysia—South EastAsia—are all in the top 10 export destinationsfor Queensland purchased product. Althoughthe Asian financial crisis commenced withThailand in early 1997, the impact onQueensland did not become apparent until theIndonesian and Malaysian economies startedto be affected in the middle of that year. Acomparison of the food and fibre export tradefigures for Queensland and its five mostimportant Asian trading partners for the periodbetween 1996-97, which was $2.293 billion,and the 1998-99 financial years, which was at$1.876 billion—those are preliminaryfigures—shows an initial fall of $A450m in thefirst year to $1.843 billion, followed by animprovement of $33m to $1.876 billion in1998. The five-year food and fibre exporttrading average with our major market, Japan,stands at $1.262 billion. If you look at thefigures for 1997-98, $1.277 billion, and the1998-99 result of $1.334 billion, you see that itcompares favourably with this average. Japanreceives about 70% of our Queensland foodand fibre exports to Asian markets andJapan's growth for these exports, althoughgradual, has largely negated the overall effectof the downturn. Of the five leading Asianexport trade partners, Indonesia appears to bethe one that is showing the greatest negativeeffect in terms of export trade. It went downfrom $325m in 1996-97 to $202m in 1998-99.Again, those are preliminary figures. The

product areas showing the most impact arelive cattle and horticulture, in addition to someof the other areas, such as meat, sugar,animal feedstuffs and dairy products. The onlyproduction area to show substantial growth istextile fibres, which is up from $124m in 1995-96 to $182m in 1998-99.

The CHAIRMAN: Minister, I refer you toparagraph 9 on page 45 of the 1999-2000Ministerial Portfolio Statements. Theparagraph states that the department isassisting Queensland horticulture industries tomaintain and increase export markets.Following the Asian economic crisis in 1998, isthe export market for mandarins and othercitrus fruits still flat?

Mr PALASZCZUK: If we all go back to theanswer to the previous question, we willunderstand that we have had a few problemswith the Asian countries. In particular, therewere difficulties in our key mandarin markets inAsia in 1998. There has been some modestrecovery in these key Asian markets. Inaddition, the Queensland citrus industry hasmoved to expand into other regional marketssuch as Canada. I am pleased to advise that,after some 12 years of research andnegotiations on plant health concerns,Japanese quarantine authorities haveapproved the entry of Queensland mandarinsto Japan from the 1999 season. TheQueensland mandarin industry has respondedquickly to the opening up of the Japanesemarket and in excess of 80,000 cartons ofQueensland mandarins have been sold intothe Japanese market in the 1999 season.Whilst our mandarin industry is currentlyanalysing the results of its first season inJapan, there is confidence that Japan willbecome an important and valuable market. Iinvite Dr Ken Jackson to add to that.

Dr JACKSON: I think we owe a debt tothe disinfestation team working out of Cairns,which helped to accomplish the export ofmandarins to Japan. Last Thursday night, theywere the recipients of a Premier's award forexport assistance. Of the 10 prestigiousawards made by the Premier that night, it wasthe only Government department that receivedan award.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much forthose answers. The time allotted for theconsideration of the Estimates of expenditurefor the Minister for Primary Industries has nowexpired. I thank the Minister and also theportfolio officers for their attendance and all ofthe effort put into this process.

Sitting suspended from 11.49 a.m. to11.59 a.m.

550 Estimates G—Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy; 14 Oct 1999Women's Policy; and Fair Trading

ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDERPOLICY; WOMEN 'S POLICY; AND FAIR TRADING

IN ATTENDANCE

Hon. J. C. Spence, Minister for Aboriginaland Torres Strait Islander Policy andMinister for Women's Policy andMinister for Fair Trading

Ms M. O'Donnell, Director-GeneralMs K. Tim, Executive Director,

Department of Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander Policy andDevelopment

Ms U. Zeller, Acting Commissioner forConsumer Affairs

Ms S. Belfrage, Executive Director, Officeof Women's Policy

Ms C. Mason, General Manager,Residential Tenancies Authority

Mr M. Miller, General Manager,Queensland Building Services

Mr T. Haralampou, Registrar/Manager,Queensland Building Tribunal

Ms J. Archer, General Manager, Businessand Executive Services, Departmentof Equity and Fair Trading

Mr R. Schamburg, Manager, FinancialServices, Business and ExecutiveServices, Department of Equity andFair Trading

The CHAIRMAN: The hearings ofEstimates G are now resumed. The next itemfor consideration is the proposed expenditurefor the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres StraitIslander Policy and Minister for Women'sPolicy and Minister for Fair Trading. The timeallotted is three hours. The Committeeproposes to consider in the first hour theproposed expenditure for the Department ofAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy andDevelopment and the Office of Women'sPolicy. Following lunch, the Committee willconsider the proposed expenditure for theOffice of Fair Trading.

For the information of the Minister andwitnesses, I point out that the time limit forquestions is one minute and for answers it isthree minutes. A single chime will give a 15-second warning and a further double chime willsound at the end of these time limits. Anextension of time may be given with theconsent of the questioner. A double chime willalso sound two minutes after the extension oftime has been given. The Sessional Orders

require that at least half of the time availablefor questions and answers in respect of eachorganisational unit is to be allotted to non-Government members and that any timeexpended when the Committee deliberates inprivate is to be equally apportioned betweenGovernment and non-Government members.Also, in accordance with the Sessional Orders,each Minister is permitted to make an openingstatement of up to five minutes. Again, asingle chime will give a 15-second warning anda further double chime will sound at the end ofthat time limit. For the benefit of Hansard, I askdepartmental officers to identify themselveswhen they first come forward to answer aquestion. I also ask that all mobile phones beswitched off.

I now declare the proposed expenditurefor the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres StraitIslander Policy and Minister for Women'sPolicy and Minister for Fair Trading to be openfor examination. The question before theCommittee is—


Minister, do you wish to make a shortintroductory statement or do you wish toproceed directly to questioning?

Ms SPENCE: Yes, I would like to makean opening statement. As this EstimatesCommittee hearing is split into two sessions, Iwill be making two short introductorystatements, the first on Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander Policy and Women's Policy andthe second, at the beginning of session two,on Fair Trading, which includes the Office ofFair Trading, the Residential TenanciesAuthority, the Queensland Building ServicesAuthority and the Queensland BuildingServices Tribunal.

I now wish to introduce the officers frommy department sitting at the table: theDirector-General of the Department ofAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy andDevelopment and the Director-General of theDepartment of Equity and Fair Trading, MsMarg O'Donnell; the Executive Director,Department of Aboriginal and Torres StraitIslander Policy and Development, Kerrie Tim;the Executive Director, Office of Women'sPolicy, Stephanie Belfrage; the GeneralManager, Business and Executive Services,Jan Archer; the Manager, Financial Services,Business and Executive Services, RossSchamburg.

The Department of Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander Policy and Development andthe Office of Women's Policy share the goals

14 Oct 1999 Estimates G—Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy; 551Women's Policy; and Fair Trading

of better opportunities and quality of life forQueenslanders. They want Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander Queenslanders andwomen and girls to approach the next centurywith a new sense of confidence. To make thispossible, both DATSIPD and the Office ofWomen's Policy have executed significantchanges in policy direction during the first yearof the Labor Government. They now have akeener focus on smart service to the people ofQueensland. This attitude is manifest in theBudget for 1999-2000. In many ways, theDATSIPD budget of $102.1m is a triumph forsound policy development during 1998-99.New funding initiatives include $25.4m tocompensate past Government employees forwage racism, $5.8m for new Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander Council Chambers and$12m for the new stores in the Torres Strait.Each of these initiative stems from compellingwork by departmental staff in partnership withAboriginal and Torres Strait Islandercommunities. These partnerships have beenembodied in a new degree of trust from thecommunities. That trust has grown through thecreation of a separate department with theclear brief of being the lead Governmentagency.

In line with the Labor Government'spriorities, DATSIPD has distanced itself fromthe welfare model and worked on empoweringcommunities. It supports and will continue tosupport successful initiatives emanating fromthe communities through the Local JusticeProgram. DATSIPD staff team with remotecommunities to deliver their essential waterand sewerage infrastructure and encouragetraining and employment for local people. In asimilar vein, staff work with local government toencourage accountable and appropriatecommunity governance. DATSIPD joins withother Government agencies to promote amore equitable justice system as well asrecognition and protection of culture andheritage.

Just as DATSIPD gives indigenousQueenslanders a stronger voice inGovernment, so the Office of Women's Policypromotes the interests of women and girls. Inthe past year it grew more receptive to a widerrange of Queensland women. The views itbrings to Government and translates intopolicy are now more inclusive and honest thanunder the previous administration. Workingwith an operating budget of $4.1m in 1999-2000, the Office of Women's Policy willenhance a community partnership it builds. Aseries of community outreach forums,beginning with one in Logan this month, will be

central to this objective. The forums will involvethe Premier's Council for Women, which has abudget of $265,000 devoted primarily toemployment issues. Like a highly successfulround table meeting of women's organisationsheld in Brisbane last fiscal year, the forums willallow a diverse range of women to speakdirectly to me and to the Office of Women'sPolicy.

I want to take this opportunity to thank thestaff of DATSIPD and the Office of Women'sPolicy for their proficiency in implementingGovernment priorities during our first year ofGovernment. I would now welcome questionson the Department of Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander Policy Development and theOffice of Women's Policy.

The CHAIRMAN: The first period ofquestions will begin with non-Governmentmembers. With leave of the Committee, themember for Maroochydore has joined theCommittee.

Miss SIMPSON: Thank you very much,Minister, and your staff for your time. As theMinister responsible for women's policy, I referthe Minister to the New Directions statement ofthe Queensland Labor Party tabled in theHouse on 10 March 1998. In that document apolicy commitment made to the electorate wasthat the budget will be increased in the area ofdomestic violence by $2m per year to a totalexpenditure of $5.5m. In the MinisterialPortfolio Statements accompanying thebudget on pages 2-11 and 2-12, it is statedthat your department administered in 1998-99$1m in domestic violence funds for innovativeprograms to assist women victims of DV inindigenous and non-indigenous communities.Further, in your proposed future developmentsyou have committed just the $1m domesticviolence funding for innovative programs toassist women victims of DV which will beallocated through OWP to the DFYCC. Why isit that you have committed only $1m in thisareas against the stated policy declaration ofan extra $2m per year?

Ms SPENCE: The Office of Women'sPolicy has been allocated $1m each year forfour years to undertake specific domesticviolence programs. The additional funding thatthe Government has promised and, indeed,has allocated to domestic violence has goneinto the portfolio of my colleague the Ministerfor Families, Youth and Community Care. The$1m that was allocated to the Office ofWomen's Policy last year has been spent onnew initiatives in domestic violence.


On becoming Minister, both for Aboriginalpolicy and women's policy, I quickly realisedthat I believe that indigenous domestic policyinitiatives had been underfunded by previousQueensland Governments of all politicalpersuasions. I made the decision to allocateapproximately half of that $1m funding toindigenous domestic violence programs, andthat was administered by the Department ofAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy inthe last year. We cannot in a short period oftime hope to overcome past injustices andpast underspending in the areas of domesticviolence, particularly Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander domestic violence. But we have,with that allocation of an extra half a milliondollars, attempted to fund a number ofindigenous programs around this State thathave previously been underfunded. I guess Iam in a unique position as Minister for bothareas to look closely at the whole domesticviolence situation on Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander communities. I can assure youthat we are playing catch-up when we areattempting to deal with this situation.

I was very pleased recently to open a newdomestic violence shelter in Lockhart River,which cost the Government over $800,000 tobuild. I was pleased to work closely with mycolleagues the Minister for Families and theMinister for Housing to find funds tocommence building a new domestic violenceshelter at Palm Island and that, I understand,has begun construction. As well, I amnegotiating with my colleagues to find funds inthis year's budget to provide a new shelter atNapranum, where the need is great. Thecommunity currently operates a makeshiftdomestic violence shelter out of a tin shed with10 steel cots. But there is catch-up.

As well, from the other half a milliondollars allocated to the Office of Women'sPolicy last year, we were able to start funding acourt assistance domestic violence project,something that is long overdue in this State. Inother States they have been fully funded. Weare piloting a number of court assistanceprojects around Queensland and, when wework out how those services are delivered andthe best model, we will continue with thatprogram.

Miss SIMPSON: I suppose as asupplementary to that question, would you beable to confirm whether that additional$1m—you talked about an additional $1m inyour area of responsibility. But is there abalance of another $1m to make up that $2mextra as promised in the Family Servicesbudget?

Ms SPENCE: You will have to ask theMinister for Families about the funding fordomestic violence in her budget. I understandshe will appear before the EstimatesCommittee this afternoon. I am sure she willbe happy to answer those questions.

Miss SIMPSON: I believe that you shouldbe able to know how much she is allocating inthat because it was a key election promise inthe area of domestic violence. Even thoughthere may be split responsibilities, your policyarea should still be reviewing what is beingdelivered in other areas. My next question is inrelation to whether you have an eatingdisorder strategy and how much money youare contributing for this and where these fundsare being spent.

Ms SPENCE: We certainly do have aneating disorder strategy. I am pleased toannounce that I, with my colleague theMinister for Families, recently launched one ofour Government's responses to that strategy.We have this year funded a Girl GeniusCampaign. It has been funded by the Office ofWomen's Policy to the tune of $80,000. TheDepartment of Families, Youth andCommunity Care have contributed $70,000.This is an exciting new project which targetsyoung girls between the ages of 11 and 14. Inthe past many of our eating disorder projectshave targeted teenage girls and, indeed, olderwomen. But all of the advice we receiveindicates that you really do have to get to girlsmuch younger than the teenage years, andthat is unfortunate.

The project that we have launched is aseries of postcards and posters. They aredesigned to be used in schools andcommunity groups. They are going to bedistributed in the December and Januaryeditions of Girlfriend magazine, which Iunderstand is the magazine that is mostpopularly read by girls of this particular agegroup. In planning the campaign, we took theposters and postcards to a number of focusgroups and the girls were enthusiastic aboutthe type of campaign and the messages thatwe were giving out in the Girl GeniusCampaign.

As well, as part of the eating disorderproject, we have allocated $410,000 to focuson other strategies. $200,000 of the fundswere made available on a non-recurrent basisin an eating disorder grants program. Thepriorities of the program were a researchcomponent to identify gaps in the provision ofservices and to recommend future planningcoordination, a young women's componentand a component aimed at providing


information and education to healthprofessionals. As well, we made fundsavailable in the amount of $208,000—I shouldclarify that. $200,000 was for the first strategy.Another $208,000 worth of grants was madeto organisations such as the La Boite Theatre.We gave them $20,000 for a regional tour of aproduction called What Is the Matter with MaryJane? It is a wonderful one person play whichdeals with the whole subject of anorexia. It istravelling around schools. I had the opportunityof seeing the play. I think it is excellent. Wehave also allocated $80,000 for a youthawareness campaign and $108,000 to workwith Education Queensland for professionaldevelopment of teachers, school nurses andguidance officers.

Miss SIMPSON: I again refer you to thesame Queensland Labor Party statementdocument wherein your party pledged to—

"... assist some child-care centres to hosta regular, early morning GP service. Thiswill give busy parents a one-stop clinic forchildren's immunisation, check-ups andattention to the frequent infections youngchildren catch before their immunity buildsup. The doctors working in the clinics willforward clinical information to the child'sgeneral practitioners to ensure continuityof care."

What have you done and what progress hasbeen undertaken to implement this policycommitment?

Ms SPENCE: The responsibility for theimplementation of that budgetary area lies withthe Minister for Families, Youth andCommunity Care, who has the Office of ChildCare within her portfolio. The Office ofWomen's Policy does not have any specificchild-care budget. However, we are workingwith that department to implement theprogram that you were just mentioning.

On a personal level, I have had thedelight to work with a private child-care agencyat Sunnybank, which I believe was the first inthe State to start, on its own initiative, an earlymorning GP clinic. They were fortunate inbeing able to do that, because one of themothers in the child-care group was a GP whothought of the idea of starting the clinic. Iunderstand it is operating very successfully.That has happened without the funding ofGovernment, although we did assist that child-care agency in getting through the red tape insome of our legislation to make that occur.Although it can work successfully at a privatechild-care centre in a fairly affluent part ofQueensland where parents want the service

and can afford to pay for the service, thechallenge for us is to initiate that kind of GPearly morning clinic in other child-care centreswhere funds may not be so easily availableand where they do not have GPs knocking atthe door wanting to run a clinic. I believe thereis a future for child-care clinics. It is certainly aneed that many mothers and parentsgenerally express to me. People who in theirbusy lives do not have the time to include avisit to the doctor for their children find it a veryuseful service. We will continue supporting it.

Miss SIMPSON: I think there is a lot ofmerit in that particular proposal. The questionis: when is that going to happen? It was acommitment of your party on coming toGovernment. What sort of monitoring role doyou have in making sure that those key areas,which are very much related to the women'spolicy area, are actually implemented—even ifthey are sitting under another Minister'sportfolio?

Ms SPENCE: As I explained before, theresponsibility for the budget for that area andthe initiative for that area falls within theDepartment of Families, Youth andCommunity Care, which has the Office of ChildCare within its agency. Of course, the Office ofWomen's Policy is very interested in the wholeissue of child care. In so many other issuesthat concern Queensland women—whether itis women who catch public transport, womenin sport or women in education—the role of theOffice of Women's Policy's is to have input intothe policy decisions of other Governmentagencies. It is a job that it does very well. Thatis a job that, as Minister, I have asked theOffice of Women's Policy to refocus on underthe Labor Government. I believe it is doingthat. It is certainly working with the child-careagency to ensure that our commitments andour promises are met.

Miss SIMPSON: I again refer you to theQueensland Labor Party New Directions policydocument where it is stated—

"A Labor Government will establish achild-care industry forum involvingrepresentatives of all stakeholders,including parents, unions, communitychild-care centres, private child-carecentres, family day care services, outsideschool hours care services, early child-care experts and school principals. Thatongoing forum will consider the issuesaffecting the delivery of child care inQueensland and advise the Minister ofways to improve the quality andavailability of child care across the State."


As the Minister responsibility for women'spolicy, what steps have you undertaken toestablish the forum? What are the results ofthat ongoing forum on child-care delivery?What measures have you implemented toimprove the quality and availability of child careacross the State, as your policy stated it woulddo? This is still a sector that the women'spolicy area has to be strongly involved inmonitoring and helping to implement.

Ms SPENCE: I think the honourablemember is a bit slow to get the point that Ihave made in the previous two replies. I do nothave a budget nor do I have the directresponsibility for delivering child care. That liessquarely with the Minister for Families, Youthand Community Care, who has the child-careagency in her department. However, Iunderstand that the child-care industry forumthat you are alluding to has already beenestablished. You may care to ask the Ministerabout the details of that. I will reiterate onceagain that the Office of Women's Policy looksat whole-of-Government women's issues. Weare as concerned about child care as we areconcerned about women's safety at railwaystations, women's access to non-traditionalwork and women in education. We do notundertake responsibility for all those initiatives.We work with those departments to ensurethat a woman's perspective is heard andunderstood by other Government agencieswhen framing their policies.

Miss SIMPSON: I have heard youranswer. The question really is: what are youdoing—

The CHAIRMAN: I ask the member tocease this line of questioning. The Minister ishere to answer questions about her portfolio.The Minister has already objected on anumber of occasions to questions outside herresponsibility.

Miss SIMPSON: With respect, this is theOffice of Women's Policy. These are issuesthat are relevant to women's policy. Unless youare wanting to censor this particular line ofquestioning—

The CHAIRMAN: I am not wanting to dothat at all. In the same context—and I do notwant to debate the matter here—

Miss SIMPSON: I will put it in these termsso you understand, Mr Chairman. Minister, youhave a social and fiscal responsibility charterthat talks about transparency andaccountability in Government. You also haveLabor Party policy that talks about issues thatare clearly related to the women's policy area.My question is: what are the outputs of your

policy area if you are not involved in monitoringthe delivery of child-care services, in particularthis forum? In short terms, what are you doingin regard to these things?

Ms SPENCE: I would invite thehonourable member to read through pastEstimates committees debates on women'spolicy. I understand her frustration, because Isat there year after year during Estimatescommittees and attempted the same line ofquestioning to the Honourable Joan Sheldonwhen she was the Minister responsible forwomen's policies. I guess I tried to get answersout of her about the Department of PrimaryIndustries' women's initiatives in family-friendlyworkplaces. I tried to get answers out of herabout what the sport and recreationdepartment was doing with respect to women.On each occasion, the Minister responsible forwomen's policy at the time would not answerquestions that were not directly related to herbudget. Although she professed to have awhole-of-Government understanding of whatother agencies were doing, she would notanswer questions that were not related directlyto the women's policy statement and budget.Basically, I think it is unreasonable for themember to expect me to have a direct line toevery single budget in every other departmentand know the intricacies of their policy andtheir budgets.

Mr DAVIDSON: Are you driving women'spolicy in the State or are you relying on yourcolleagues to do that?

Ms SPENCE: I take it that that is the nextquestion. Certainly, the Office of Women'sPolicy, as I have said a number of times today,has a whole-of-Government view. It certainlyregards itself as the premier agency inGovernment to direct women's policy andsuggest women's policies to other agencies.That is a role that it takes very seriously and, Ibelieve, does very well. However, it is notdirectly responsible for budgets that lie in otherportfolios. It has an interagency brief. That issomething that it does very well.

One of the achievements in the last yearhas been the publishing of a social andeconomic profile of women in Queensland.That was a whole-of-Government look at thestatus of women in all areas of work and living.I invite the honourable member to get a copyof that and have a look at that. The otherthings that the office is involved in are the TaskForce on Women and the Criminal Code,which we jointly sponsor with my colleague theAttorney-General. Each year we are launchingthe annual action plan for women. Welaunched the first on International Women's


Day this year. We will continue to launch thaton International Women's Day. The annualaction plan details what each Governmentagency is doing with respect to women'spolicy. It is meant to be, if you like, a reportcard on how the Labor Government is goingabout implementing and achieving positivepolicies for women and girls in Queensland. Aswell, this year we hosted a round table thatwas attended by representatives of 55Queensland women's organisations Statewide.

In all areas of Government policy theOffice of Women's Policy has a contribution tomake. They regularly brief me on Cabinetsubmissions and give a women's perspective,and they informally and formally meet withofficers of every agency of this Government togive a women's policy perspective.

Miss SIMPSON: I refer you to note 1 onpage 2-14, in which you have claimed that thedifference between budgeted and actualexpenditure for the 1998-99 financial year wasdue to building and motor vehicle leasingcosts, under "other expenses". How do youexpect us to believe that the difference of$2.034m between the budget and actualfigures for supplies and services is due to costsbeing accounted under "other expenses",which has a total of only $184,000.

Ms SPENCE: I will ask the ExecutiveDirector of the Office of Women's Policy,Stephanie Belfrage, to respond.

Ms BELFRAGE: I am happy to respondto that question. The difference between whatis stated as the budget for the 1998-99budget, $4.638m, and what was actually takenin revenue, $3.424m, can be explained by thenote. There are two factors there. Theexceeding of the budget does refer to buildingand motor vehicle leasing costs, which in the1998-99 budget come in under "additionalexpenses". Additionally, in relation to newinitiative funding which was originally budgetedas supplies and services in the 1998-99budget, in the actual budget there is a specialsection for that. That explains the differencebetween the two figures.

In terms of the payments for outputs,which is the first line of revenues on thatstatement, there is a difference there of$1.2m. That comes from a transfer of funds ofapproximately half a million dollars through amachinery of Government process directly tothe Department of Families, Youth andCommunity Care for the Domestic ViolenceFund. The remainder of that amount is forcarryovers into the current financial year.

The second line, user charges, sets outthat the amount of $135,000 was budgetedand the amount of $78,000 was actuallyreceived. That $135,000 was for contributionsfrom other Government departments to theestablishment of the Women's Council forRural and Regional Communities. $78,000 ofthat money has been received. The remainderis still to come from the other Governmentdepartments.

Miss SIMPSON: Minister, given that youhave failed to ensure that issues relating towomen's policy which fall into other portfoliosare being addressed, how can you claim, asyour MPS does, to "ensure Governmentpolicies and services are responsive to thedistinct and diverse needs of women and girlsin Queensland"?

Ms SPENCE: I do not know how themember can make the assertion that I havefailed to ensure that women's policy in otherGovernment departments is being addressed.I have spent most of the question time in thisEstimates briefing trying to explain to themember that the first role of the Office ofWomen's Policy is to work with otherGovernment departments to ensure thatissues and policies that affect women and girlsin Queensland are considered by otherGovernment departments. We do that in anumber of forums in a number of ways.

As I mentioned, one of the things theWomen's Policy Unit does each Monday isbrief me on budget submissions, as they briefother Government departments when they areformulating budget submissions. This hasbecome central to the Office of Women'sPolicy under this Government, unlike theformer Women's Policy Unit under the coalitionGovernment, which forgot the whole policyissue and got out there and promoted itselfand promoted the Government in a shamelessway. This policy unit is focusing onGovernment. We are about highlightingGovernment's policy priorities for women andensuring that other Government departmentsmeet those policy priorities.

If the member would care to have a lookat the Annual Action Plan for Women, whichwe launched for the first time this year andwhich we will continue producing each March,the member would gain some understandingof the role that the Office of Women's Policyhas in promoting successful policies for womenand girls under this Government.

Miss SIMPSON: Minister, of the 748nominations for significant appointmentsprovided by the Office of Women's Policy, how


many nominees were successful in theirappointments, who were these nominees andto which positions were they appointed? If youwant to table that information—

Ms SPENCE: We do not have specificnumbers. You are asking me basically howmany women have been appointed toGovernment boards in the last year, who thosewomen are and which boards. No, we do nothave that sort of information available. What Ican tell you is that the Office of Women'sPolicy has been very active in promoting theregister. We have achieved an increase in thepercentage of women on Government boardsin this State. I have to say: it is not progressingas quickly as I would have hoped, but wehave, I understand, improved the percentagefrom 23% under the coalition Government to25%. We have seen an increase in thenumber of women appointed to Governmentboards and statutory authorities. The Women'sRegister is integral in ensuring that that occurs.

If you compare the achievements of thisGovernment with those of the formerGovernment in appointing women to majorpositions, we score very well. Unlike any otherEstimates Committee I suggest, certainlyunder the former Government, you havebefore you today senior executives of mydepartment who happen to all be women. It isa proud achievement under this LaborGovernment that we have three directors-general who are women; shamefully, underthe coalition Government, there were none.

We have targets to get women onboards. We have targets to increase thenumber of women in the senior executiveservice of this Public Service, and we will doso. We have targets to ensure that womenand girls get their part in job opportunities inQueensland. We have a very proud record sofar in ensuring that women get opportunities atthe traineeships that the Government isoffering.

Unfortunately, we are not being quite sosuccessful in enlisting women and girls asapprentices as I would have hoped. This is adifficult area, but we have targeted thatparticular area for specific attention. ThePremier's Council for Women, establishedunder this Government, has as its first task tolook at women's employment opportunitiesand women in the workplace. I have askedthem specifically to focus on the area ofwomen and non-traditional work.

The CHAIRMAN: I call the member forMundingburra.

Ms NELSON-CARR: Page 2-12 of theMPS refers to the Office of Women's Policyholding a series of community outreach forumsfor women across Queensland. Can yououtline the aims and objectives of suchforums?

Ms SPENCE: I thank the honourablemember for the question. I think one of thehallmarks of the Beattie Labor Governmenthas been this Government's desire and indeedcapacity to get out there and talk to ordinaryQueenslanders. We have institutedCommunity Cabinets. We have 13 a yearthroughout the State. We have institutedregional forums, which occur four times a year.All of these are very successful and have beenreceived very positively by Queenslandersgenerally. I have asked the Office of Women'sPolicy to start a process of communityforums—community outreach forums—because never in the past has the Women'sPolicy Office gone out there and talked toordinary women in Queensland the way theGovernment generally has in the past year.

The Office of Women's Policy is verysuccessful, through Women's Infolink, atgetting information out to many Queenslandwomen, and I am happy to talk about thatlater in terms of statistics. However, they havenot done the face-to-face meetings that mightbe expected of them. This month—in fact,next week—we will be holding our firstcommunity outreach forum in Logan City. Weare doing that in conjunction with the LoganCity Council and many women's organisationsin Logan City. I understand the response isvery positive, and we are looking to have a bigcrowd there in Logan next week. I understandthat many of the honourable members havebeen invited to come along.

This is really about the Office of Women'sPolicy and giving me, as the Women's PolicyMinister, the opportunity to sit down withwomen throughout Queensland and listen tothe issues that concern them. It will also giveus the opportunity to explain Governmentpolicy to them and also explain the range ofservices available to them from Government;because I am concerned that, while we, as aGovernment, provide a lot of services, it is verydifficult for women to gain an understanding ofwhat might be available to them. That is thepurpose of these outreach forums. I expectthat this one will be very successful next weekand that the Office of Women's Policy will, ona regular basis, conduct these outreachforums throughout the State

Ms NELSON-CARR: With regard to theWomen's Infolink, which you were speaking


about before, can you inform the Committee ifthere has been a significant increase in thenumber of women contacting Women'sInfolink offices around the State?

Ms SPENCE: The Office of Women'sPolicy has Women's Infolinks in Brisbane, onthe Sunshine Coast and in Townsville. Thenumber of women making contact withWomen's Infolink has increased by nearly 45%in the last financial year. The numbers rosefrom 19,838 in 1998 to 25,674 in 1999,demonstrating, I believe, a demand for theservices provided.

Contacts to that Women's Infolink areprimarily from women seeking crisis informationabout things like legal issues, health services,employment and violence-related matters.Rural women are also high users of thisservice. The number of women who soughtinformation like info sheets and otherresources has almost tripled in the lastfinancial year, and the number of women whoare accessing the computers provided byInfolink for job seeking and research purposesmore than doubled in the last financial yearfrom over 1,000 in 1998 to 2,500 in 1999. Thenumber of women who were trained and whoare using the Internet services provided in thatoffice also doubled from 300 in 1998 to 600 in1999.

Women's Infolink does not just respond,though, to phone calls, nor does it just sendout info sheets to women who seekassistance. They also operate and maintain aweb site called Bush Talk, which is specificallydesigned for rural women and is very popularwith rural women. They also produce anewspaper called QW, which is produced fourtimes a year and is sent out to 8,000organisations and individuals throughoutQueensland.

Women's Infolink is also very involved inorganising activities for International Women'sDay. But I guess that the greatest strength ofWomen's Infolink is its ability to respond toQueensland women in crisis. Women who pickup the phone and make that free call toWomen's Infolink throughout the Stateimmediately get a listening ear from ourtrained people at the other end. Theyimmediately receive information that will directthem to services that they need in times ofcrisis. I had the opportunity recently, whenvisiting western Queensland, to look at thevideoconferencing facilities out there, and I amsuggesting that, in the next year, we actuallyexpand those services in Women's Infolink sothat women in rural and regional Queenslandcan talk face-to-face to our officers.

Ms NELSON-CARR: With reference onpage 2-11 to the Premier's Council forWomen, which is a State peak bodyrepresenting the interests of Queenslandwomen, what work has the council undertakensince its inception?

Ms SPENCE: I am pleased that you havegiven me the opportunity to expand on thework of the Premier's Council for Women. As Isaid previously, it was established under thisGovernment. It is a group of 12 women whocome from all parts of the State, all differenttypes of backgrounds and occupations. It isthe first time that a council has had directaccess to a Minister for Women's Policy, and Imeet with this council regularly. They also havedirect access to the Premier, and the Premierhas met with the council and will meet with thechair of the council on a regular basis.

The Premier and I have asked thePremier's council to undertake, as its first task,a comprehensive report on women and work-related issues. To date, the council hasconducted research and identified key issuesand current strategies on women and work,including work force participation, thecasualisation of labour, family-friendly workpractices, non-traditional training andemployment, pay equity and workplaceculture. I think we would all agree that theseissues need ongoing attention fromGovernment, because when we let the focusdrop from these particular issues we findworkplace practices that are discriminatingagainst women—and there have been somevery high-profile cases of that revealed recentlyby both Commonwealth and State Anti-Discrimination Commissions.

The council has developed an informationbrochure for wide distribution to thecommunity, describing its role and currentwork, as well as providing details about councilmembers. They are developing a work webpage as a resource for women on a widerange of work issues, and that will be launchedin November.

It is important, I think, for Premier'scouncils or any kind of consultative councilssuch as this to have a high profile and letwomen in their communities know who themembership of this council is. It is only bythem truly representing the women in theircommunities that they will bring those issues tothe attention of their own members of thecouncil and, indeed, to the attention of theGovernment.

I am very impressed by the work of thewomen—the individual women—on that


Premier's council, who have endeavoured togo back to their local communities and makecontact with women's organisations andachieve a high profile for themselves and thiscouncil. I am looking forward to a lot of positivework from the council in the years ahead.

Mr FENLON: Minister, page 2-11 of theMPS refers to the Women and ReconciliationStrategy. Can the Minister outline the aim ofthe strategy and what work was undertaken inthis program in 1998-99?

Ms SPENCE: This is a new initiative of theLabor Government. When I became Ministerfor Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policyand Women's Policy, one of the first policydecisions I made was to institute this Womenand Reconciliation Strategy. I had served onthe State Reconciliation Council—a Federallyfunded body—for a number of years, and Ihad witnessed first-hand the lack of attentionthat council received—and the whole issue ofreconciliation received—and it seems to methat while many local councils throughout theState have really embraced reconciliation in anattempt to undertake activities in their ownlocal areas, the State Government had playeda very little role in promoting reconciliation.

One of the practical things that we didwas put an officer on this strategy, a womanby the name of Isobel Tarago. She has spentthe last year going throughout Queenslandestablishing focus groups, encouragingwomen to share their stories, and developingan understanding of important issues, such asheritage and native title issues. The storiesthat she has collected are being collated nowand will be published in a book next year aspart of this strategy.

As well, the officer has successfullysupported and promoted a number ofreconciliation events throughout Queensland.We held two reconciliation events in Brisbanein March last year, but we have held a numberof reconciliation events throughout regionaland rural Queensland. I was privileged to be ata reconciliation event earlier this year that washeld by the Burketown Shire Council. Iunderstand it was the first time a reconciliationevent had ever been held in that part of theworld. It is because of the work of this officerand our department that the shire council wasgiven the support that it needed to hold areconciliation event. This has been happeningthroughout Queensland. I think that we, as aGovernment, have a role to play inreconciliation. It is part of the focus of theDepartment of Aboriginal and Torres StraitIslander Policy and Development; it is part ofthe focus of the Office of Women's Policy; and

we certainly have it as a focus as a LaborGovernment.

Mr FENLON: Page 2-11 of the MPSstates that the department administered a$1m domestic violence fund for innovativeprograms to assist women victims inindigenous and non-indigenous communities.Can you explain how this $1m was allocated?

Ms SPENCE: Yes, I am happy to expandon the exact allocation of that $1m which Itouched on briefly as a result of a questionfrom the Opposition. The funds weredistributed as follows: $490,000 was spent bythe Department of Aboriginal and Torres StraitIslander Policy for new prevention initiatives inindigenous communities; $460,000 was spentin conjunction with the Department of Families,Youth and Community Care, comprising$310,000 for court support services, $15,000for the development of court supportstandards and protocols, $25,000 forresources and training for the implementationof court support standards and protocols,$60,000 for a review of responses to domesticviolence in Queensland, and $50,000 for anevaluation of the Women's CoordinatedCommunity Response; and $50,000 was alsospent by the Office of Women's Policy on theproduction of a domestic violence educationalvideo as a resource for young people.

These allocations have contributed, webelieve, to the establishment of a recurrentlyfunded court support services network forQueensland, led to a number of innovativeprograms in indigenous communities andstrengthened the resources infrastructure andevaluation of service models. The allocation of$1m under the program this year will bedeveloped cooperatively with the Departmentof Families, Youth and Community Care andthe Department of Aboriginal and Torres StraitIslander Policy and Development.

Ms NELSON-CARR: Page 2-12 refers to ajoint strategy on women as consumers with theOffice of Fair Trading and the New SouthWales Department of Women. Can youexplain what this joint strategy is?

Ms SPENCE: I thank the honourablemember for the question. The Women asConsumers project is a project that Ideveloped on becoming Minister. It seemed tome that we have had reports in the past whichclearly quantify and anecdotally talk about theexperiences of women as consumers in anumber of areas—particularly in the financearea, the real estate area, the motor tradesarea and in the services area. We have


recently had some publicity about women andhaircuts.

We have undertaken a project of workingwith the motor traders industry to help thatindustry in its dealings with women ascustomers. The industry is pleased to come onboard and work with Government in this areabecause it sees it as a positive for the industry.The industry knows that it needs to improve itsservices to women because this will supportthe industry and allow it to sell more cars andfix more cars for women, I guess.

We have established a focus group madeup of the Motor Traders Association, theRACQ, Queensland Transport, consumergroups and women's organisations who areassisting us with this project. At the recentMinisterial Councils for Women's Affairs and forConsumer Affairs I was able to enlist thesupport of my colleagues in other States whowere excited about the direction in which weare moving with this project in Queensland.These Ministers have decided that they wantto be part of this project. It will become anational project. In the next year we will befurther developing the project with otherStates.

We believe that the results of the projectwill not only help that industry deal with womenas customers, but will perhaps help otherdisadvantaged people. It may assist in howindustries deal with people who are disabled orwho come from non-English speakingbackgrounds. I expect that once this project iscompleted and we judge the success of theprogram we will move on and work withanother industry in the same way in order tohelp it improve its service delivery to women ascustomers.

Mr MUSGROVE: I want to turn toAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander policy.Page 1-9 of the Ministerial PortfolioStatements indicates that a high priority isbeing given to the completion of a strategicmapping project which will highlight programand expenditure overlaps betweenQueensland Government agencies. Clearly,this will have an impact on the whole-of-Government coordination role with which yourdepartment has been charged as far asindigenous matters are concerned. How farhas this project progressed and what does itmean to the people of Queensland?

Ms SPENCE: The reason for establishinga separate department for Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander Policy and Developmentin the first place was so that we could establishan agency which clearly had a lead agency

role over indigenous affairs in this State.Although when this office was attached to theFamilies portfolio it was intended that it wouldhave a lead agency role, it was alwayssuggested to me that it was difficult to havethat kind of lead agency role when it wasattached to another Government departmentwith a greater budget and perhaps differentkinds of responsibilities. Indigenous people inQueensland have always believed that theydid not necessarily want their agency attachedto a welfare portfolio, which is what Families isprimarily all about, I guess. We established anew department with a lead agency whole-of-Government role.

The other issue which I think has been acause of concern for many years—not only forindigenous people but for committees of thisParliament, such as the Public WorksCommittee and the Public AccountsCommittee—is that there has never been anysignificant whole-of-Government coordinationabout how we spend Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander dollars in this State. As theCommittee is aware, there are Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander units in manyGovernment departments: for example, inEducation and others. What we have found isthat those units go out and do their own thingand spend their own dollars without a greatunderstanding of what is happening in otherGovernment agencies.

Indigenous people have complained tome that what they get all the time fromGovernments is people going out consulting,consulting, consulting, reinventing the wheeland spending money on programs that havealready been tried and failed. There has notbeen a body of knowledge or understanding ofwhat is going on from a whole-of-Governmentperspective.

One of the first duties of the newdepartment has been to undertake a strategicmapping project, which basically means thatthe department is taking a stocktake ofGovernment spending on indigenousQueensland in every Government agency. Thedepartment is now getting a clear picture ofwhat is being spent and where it is beingspent. Once we have that picture it will beproduced and will be readily available. We willthen be able to take on that lead agency roleand make suggestions and negotiate withother agencies about how they prioritise theirspending and how they might measure thesuccess of their programs. The information willbe used to compile a 10-year plan forspending on indigenous Queenslanders which


the Government hopes to unveil in the first halfof next year.

Mr MUSGROVE: Thank you, Minister.That is certainly most encouraging. At 1-12 ofthe MPS you commit some $12m over fouryears to new stores in the Torres Strait. Canyou explain how this decision will benefit thosecommunities?

Ms SPENCE: It is one of my proudestachievements that in this year's Budget Imanaged to convince my colleagues that thisexpenditure was necessary. For a long time wehave heard from the Torres Strait communitiesthat the old stores on their islands are rundown. They have very poor food storagefacilities. These are stores which would beregarded as intolerable in any othercommunity in Queensland. In most respects,these stores could be judged as a health andsafety risk. I understand that workplace healthand safety officers have for a long period oftime expressed concern about the state ofthese stores.

The Department of Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander Policy engaged consultingengineers to look at these stores. As a resultof that report, the suggestion was that it wouldnot be feasible to merely upgrade the storesand that they all needed replacing. I haverecently had the opportunity to visit the TorresStrait, and particularly the outer islands of theTorres Strait. I have looked at these storesfirst-hand and I can tell you that they haveneeded replacing for a long time. Thus wehave committed $12m over four years toreplacing these stores. We will be working withthe Island Coordinating Council in deliveringthat particular project. IBIS, who manages thestores in the Torres Strait, has informed methat they plan to furnish the new stores withmodern refrigeration. That will mean that theTorres Strait Islander people will have betteraccess to fruit and vegetables and give them agreater choice and enable them to retainthose fruit and vegetables for a longer period. Iguess, given the appalling health statistics,particularly in the Torres Strait with diet-relateddiseases such as diabetes, it is beholden onthe Government to ensure that people in thatpart of the world have access to fresh fruit andvegetables if we are going to improve thosesorts of health statistics in the future. I thinkthat the $12m is really part of that wholehealth strategy.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. If Ican now turn to issues of ATSI governance.On page 1-17 of the MPS, you indicate thatyou are spending $5.8m this year to replacefour Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander

council chambers. I note that these includeMapoon, which currently does not even have acouncil. Why is there the need for new facilitiesfor these indigenous councils?

Ms SPENCE: I thank the honourablemember for the question. While the TorresStrait Islander people have been lobbyingsuccessive Governments over a number ofyears for new stores, there have been anumber of Aboriginal councils in Queenslandwhich have been lobbying for new councilchambers for a number of years. The fundingthat has been allocated to replace chambersfor Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islandercouncils will go to Bamaga, Lockhart River,Woorabinda and Mapoon. I have looked ateach of these buildings and they are in urgentneed of replacement. Given that Aboriginalcouncils have responsibilities that are notdemanded of non-indigenous councils in thisState, and given that Governments areexpecting, quite rightly, increased levels ofaccountability and efficiency from thosecouncils, it is unreasonable for us to expectthat they are going to be able to deliver thosestandards of efficiencies in the kind ofdilapidated premises that they currentlyoperate out of.

In the case of Mapoon, you are quiteright; there is no council at present. However, Iam very optimistic that we will get theCommunity Services Act amendments, whichare currently before the Parliament, passed inthe next session of Parliament to allow thepeople of Mapoon for the first time to vote fortheir own council in the elections of March2000. This is something that they have beenlobbying for for a number of years. Obviously,the people of Mapoon—they currently operateout of a donga—will need some sort of councilchambers to start themselves off as aprofessional and fully fledged council for thefirst time in March next year. So we areworking very closely with that community toensure that we deliver the kind of councilchambers that they require.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. Thehearing of Estimates Committee G is nowsuspended for a luncheon break. Hearing willresume at 2 p.m. with the Committee'sconsideration of the proposed expenditure forthe Office of Fair Trading.

Sitting suspended from 12.59 p.m. to2 p.m.

The CHAIRMAN: The hearings ofEstimates Committee G are now resumed.Does the Minister want to make a briefopening statement in relation to this?


Ms SPENCE: Yes, Mr Chairman. I wouldlike to begin by introducing the additionaldepartmental officers who have joined me thisafternoon. You have already been introducedto the departmental officers on my left. On myright I would like to introduce you to theRegistrar of the Queensland Building Tribunal,Mr Theo Haralampou; the General Manager ofthe Residential Tenancies Authority, CarolynMason; the General Manager of the BuildingServices Authority, Matt Miller; and the ActingCommissioner for Consumer Affairs, Ulla Zeller.

This afternoon we are discussing theEstimates of the Department of Equity andFair Trading with a $49.4m budget. Myportfolio responsibilities include the twostatutory authorities, the Residential TenanciesAuthority and the Building Services Authority.Their work contributes to achieving a betterquality of life for Queenslanders throughimproving standards, equity, practices andconfidence in the building industry and theresidential rental market. As part of my reformprogram for the building industry, theDepartment of Equity and Fair Trading nowadministers funding for the QueenslandBuilding Tribunal, which provides fair andaffordable mediation of unresolved disputesbetween home owners and builders.

My agency's budgets have been recast todeliver on the Government's commitments andto redress the past shortfalls in coalitionfunding for key programs. The 1999-2000State Budget is the first one based on accrualoutputs. This new framework replaces the cashbased input focused budgeting system with amore open and accountable format which theGovernment introduced to better inform theQueensland public of the true costs ofGovernment services, including depreciationexpenses and accruing employeeentitlements. As part of the recent accrualsconversion process, some variations will occurbetween the 1998-99 actual unauditedfinancial statements shown in the MPS andthe audited financial statement in thedepartment's annual reports. This is due to theinclusion in the MPS financials of controlledand administered transactions, carryovers ofoutput payments and equity injections andwithdrawals.

Our achievement in such a short timeduring this transitional year demonstratesclearly the commitment, dedication, capacityand enthusiasm of the staff in my portfolio. In1999-2000, the total costs of the budget forthe Office of Fair Trading is $45m, for whichthe Government contributes $13m in controlfunds and $12m in administered funds. The

remaining funds are obtained through usercharges estimated at $6m, other revenueprincipally from the Auctioneers and AgentsFidelity Guarantee Fund at an estimated$13m, and a small equity injection.

The Office of Fair Trading works towardsachieving a better quality of life and safer andmore supportive communities for Queenslandconsumers and business traders throughpromoting integrity in the marketplace basedon the principles of fair trading, appropriateconduct and consumer protection. Strategicpriorities include improving regional andinformation services and achieving anequitable, competitive, informed and safemarketplace.

Through the current legislative reformprogram and systems realignment, I willcontinue to ensure that the services providedby my portfolio respond to the community'schanging needs and the Beattie LaborGovernment's commitment to achievingresponsible economic management andaccountability, innovation, community capacitybuilding, sustainability and more jobs forQueenslanders.

I also to take this opportunity to thankstaff of the Office of Fair Trading, theResidential Tenancies Authority, theQueensland Building Tribunal and theQueensland Building Services Authority fortheir proficiency in implementing Governmentpriorities during our first year in office. I nowwelcome questions.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. Icall on the member for Noosa, BruceDavidson.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, I refer you tothe Responsive Management—EffectiveTeamwork Building workshop held over theweekend of April 12 and 13 by the Office ofFair Trading at the Outlook, Boonah. Can youconfirm that a disagreement broke outamongst those in attendance, which also sawa fellow attendee thrown from a balcony,tearing his shirt? Is it your idea of teambuilding to have people thrown frombalconies? Did the cost of some $5,345include the cost of replacing the unfortunategentleman's shirt? Was the cost of beveragespaid for by the department throughout theduration of the weekend?

Ms SPENCE: I have to say that I amsurprised at the shallowness of the shadowMinister's first question. We have a budget ofover $40m and he is focusing on oneweekend training conference. In terms oftraining, I have the figures available for all of


my department. In the last financial year, theDepartment of Equity and Fair Trading spent$87,196 on training generally throughout thedepartment. This represents 0.57%, which isless than 1% of total employee expenses.

If the question is aimed at ourdepartmental training budgets, I am happy toanswer that. I suspect that a criticism might bethat we are not spending enough money ontraining, rather than too much. I understandthe member's colleagues in the FederalGovernment recently suggested that allcompanies and Governments should levy 2%for training on all employee areas.Unfortunately, my department has not evenmet 2%, not only in DEFT but also inDATSIPD, which only spent 0.4%. The RTAspent 0.52% and the BSA spent 0.42% oftheir total employee expenses on training. I donot know the relevance of the rest of themember's question.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, I will ask again:did you or your director-general receive abriefing on the fracas that broke out atBoonah? Did the cost of some $5,345 includethe cost of replacing the unfortunategentleman's shirt? Was the cost of beveragespaid for by the department throughout theduration of that weekend?

Ms SPENCE: I have not received abriefing on that particular conference. Youwould all be aware, through the answers thatwe have provided to questions on notice, thatthere are a number of training conferencesthat our departmental employees went to overthe last year. I certainly do not get a briefingon each of those conferences or trainingactivities. However, I am happy to ask mydirector-general to comment further on theparticular training exercise to which thehonourable member refers.

Ms O'DONNELL: The particular trainingexercise was for investigation staff of the Officeof Fair Trading. As you say, the cost wasaround $5,300, which worked out at about$200 per staff member over a two day period.I think in any estimate, that is a fairly cheapcost for staff members. I did receive a reportfollowing the article in the paper about a fracasat that training venue. My understanding isthat someone was pushed. I have had noreport that someone was pushed off abalcony. There has been no claim for anydamages by any staff member. Myunderstanding is that the beverages were paidfor by the staff.

Mr DAVIDSON: Did you receive a

complaint from the Outlook at Boonah aboutthe behaviour of your staff for that weekend?

Ms SPENCE: I will refer that question tothe director-general.

Ms O'DONNELL: No, I did not.

Mr DAVIDSON: As the Ministerresponsible for the Department of Equity andFair Trading, I refer you to last year's EstimatesCommittee where I asked about a Labor Partypolicy commitment to open new ConsumerAffairs offices in the places of rapid growth inregional areas. I refer specifically to page 65 ofthe Estimates transcripts, where youresponded in part by saying, "I hope to comeback to you in next year's budget process andannounce where the new offices will belocated in Queensland." Have you undertakenand conducted a needs analysis? If so, whenwas it completed? Where is the funding in theBudget papers to establish those offices? Ms SPENCE: In the last year we have notestablished any new offices. However, I ampleased to say that we have expanded theservices at some of our regional offices,namely, Toowoomba, Maryborough andMackay. They have all had additional staffallocated to them. This year's budget providesfor an additional five investigators to go to theGold Coast office.

In terms of opening new regionaloffices—we are certainly examining thefeasibility and, indeed, the need for that. Weare actually looking at co-locating Fair Tradingoffices with other Government departments insome regions in Queensland. That is anongoing activity.

Mr DAVIDSON: As you will recall, Minister,at the last sitting of Parliament I asked you aquestion on the current turnaround timerequired to register a business name. On 21September, my electorate office applied bysending the appropriate forms and a chequefor $93 to your department to register abusiness name. Whilst the cheque has beenpresented, to date—some 23 days later—there has been no more contact from yourdepartment and no notification of the businessname having been registered. As a result ofthe commitment you gave in the House aboutyour department's ability to fix this delayproblem, when can business in this Stateexpect you and your Government to lift yourperformance to facilitate business activities inQueensland?

Ms SPENCE: I will have to ask the ActingCommissioner for Consumer Affairs to answerthe specifics of your question. However, as Isaid in the Parliament, the change to the new


computer system to register business nameswas unavoidable. Last year, the AustralianSecurities and Investments Commission gaveadvice that Queensland should look towardsan alternative computer system for businessnames by the end of June 1999. In response,the department requested CITEC to develop anew system. Queensland Treasury approvedfunding for the project of $1.7m.

BACHCO, the system to replace the oldASCOT system, was planned to commenceoperations on 26 August 1999. The dateconversion from ASCOT to BACHCOcommenced on the evening of Friday, 20August and was largely completed onWednesday, 25 August. It was always plannedthat document processing would cease forthree working days prior to thecommencement. This fact alone waspredicated to cause arrears of work. CITECencountered conversion difficulties and,unfortunately, the system was not available forcommencement on 26 August as planned.However, BACHCO became fully operationalon Monday, 30 August, despite the fact thatthere were a number of problems encounteredwith the system and some interruptions. Evenwith the best planning, there will always beoccasional computer errors and action hasbeen taken to reduce the critical arrears.

I will take the specifics of the honourablemember's question on notice and get back tohim later today. I do not have a brief in front ofme on the particular circumstances of himwanting to register his electorate office as abusiness, but we will get back to him on that.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, I did not want toregister my electorate office as a business. Isubmitted a business registration application.In the Parliament you apologised tobusinesses in Queensland for the delays. Atthat time the delay was four weeks. It has nowbeen 23 days. The application has not beenprocessed. We have had no notification fromyour department. How long does it now takefor a business to register its name throughyour department in Queensland?

Ms SPENCE: I am surprised that theapplication to which the honourable memberrefers has taken so long. I have not receivedcomplaints of that nature. I talk to the businesscommunity frequently. We are happy to lookinto that application and get back to you with amore detailed response. I will ask the ActingCommissioner for Consumer Affairs tocomment on how long it is currently taking toregister business names.

Ms ZELLER: The most recent feedbackthat I have had is that the registration ofbusiness names has been proceeding fairlynormally. Certainly, with the new BACHCOapplication, as could be expected, there weresome teething problems. CITEC has beenaddressing those as they have arisen. Wehave been receiving very positive reportsabout the registration function. It comes as asurprise to me that there is an applicationoutstanding for that period. I will be looking toreceive a briefing on that.

Mr DAVIDSON: The application waslodged under Noosa Research. I talk tobusinesses on a regular basis, too, Minister, asyou would appreciate. I am still receivingcomplaints that there are delays in registeringbusiness names. You said in the Parliamentthat four weeks was unacceptable. This one isapproaching four weeks. How long does it nowtake for a business in Queensland to have itsname registered through your department?

Ms SPENCE: I acknowledge that therewere some problems when we changed thecomputer system for business names. As Ihave just detailed, they were unavoidable inmany respects. It was a huge project tochange from one system to another.Obviously, we are concerned that the businessnames register operates efficiently. As I said, Iam unaware of the particular circumstances ofthis case and we will get back to you beforethe end of the day.

Mr DAVIDSON: Through you, Minister, if Imay, to Mrs Zeller, what is the current waitingtime for a business to register its namethrough the department? Is it seven days, 14days or 30 days? Our application isapproaching four weeks and we still have nothad confirmation that that name is registered.What is causing the delay?

Ms ZELLER: The advice that I havereceived is that we have returned to a normalperiod for the registration of a business name,which means that in most instances it can bedone on the spot. For business nameapplications that have been lodged in ourregional offices we have a process in placewhereby the application gets faxed to theBrisbane office and the search function andthe attendant functions are done on the spot.Basically, the applicant for the business namecan wait in the regional office while a businessname is registered. Was the applicationlodged in a regional office?

Mr DAVIDSON: No, it was sent throughthe post. We rang the department andrequested an application. We received that


within two days. We sent that back with acheque, which has been banked. As I said, itis now approaching four weeks and we havereceived no confirmation from the department.

Ms ZELLER: I hope we do not have aproblem with Australia Post in this instance.

Mr DAVIDSON: I have had a number ofother complaints from other businesspeople.

Ms ZELLER: Certainly, it is a matter that Iview with grave concern, because it is contraryto the feedback that I have been getting aboutthe turnaround time for registration of businessnames.

Ms SPENCE: I wish to draw the attentionof the honourable member to the tableheaded "Output Statement" on page 2-9 ofthe MPS. It is stated in respect of licensingand registrations that applications are normallyprocessed within an average of 15 days. Thatis the answer to your question.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, I note you juststated that there was funding of some $1.7mfor the BACHCO project. What was the actualcost of BACHCO from CITEC? Was BACHCOan off-the-shelf software application or didCITEC engage programmers to develop it?

Ms SPENCE: I will have to seek someadvice on the details of that question. I will askthe acting commissioner to answer thisquestion.

Ms ZELLER: The cost of the system is$1.7m, or it is currently still under developmentfor that figure. The approximate breakup ofthat figure is $1.1m for the development of thesoftware application. You asked whether it wasan off-the-shelf application. No, it was not. Newground has been broken in the developmentof this replacement application. The balance ofthe $1.7m is related to hardware costs.

As I mentioned previously, after receivingnotice from the then ASC that we had to getoff its ASCOT system by mid this year, overthe past 12 months we have had to gothrough the whole tendering process, which wehave done, and CITEC was the successfultenderer there. The whole development phaseof this application has occurred over thisperiod. Although it is not cutting into newground with the technology involved, it is quitea unique software application in so far as it isdealing with so much data and in a range ofcategories of data that is pretty wellunprecedented in Australia, to myunderstanding, with such a softwareapplication. This, of course, has also been acontributing factor to certain teethingproblems, and we are very pleased that these

have been resolved by CITEC as quickly asthey have been.

Mr DAVIDSON: Given that this issue hasbeen going on for some months, whatguarantees did you have from CITEC or theprogram developers that this system would suityour requirements? There have beenproblems with this system for the past three orfour months. Why can this not be resolved?

Ms SPENCE: I understand that throughthe formal tendering process CITEC gave usthose undertakings and there is a three-monthwarranty on the program. I think you areoverstating the problems that are concernedwith the transition, although we doacknowledge that it did not happen assmoothly as we would have liked. But Icertainly have not had complaints frombusiness about the delays to which you allude.This system has been so successful thatQueensland's application will be used by fourother jurisdictions as well as six otherinformation brokers. Basically, Queensland isleading the way nationally in business namesregistration.

Mr DAVIDSON: I will ask you again: whatguarantees did you get from CITEC or thedevelopers of the programs? Were anypenalties associated with the letting of thattender?

Ms SPENCE: I will ask the actingcommissioner to respond to that.

Mr DAVIDSON: Were any penaltiesassociated with the letting of this tender basedon non-performance of the program?

Ms ZELLER: The penalties or redress areprovided for in the contract that has beenentered into by the department on behalf ofthe State Government and CITEC. Thecontract has been based upon thespecifications that were tailor-made for thesystem in consultation with our agency. Therelief available is provided for under thecontract itself.

Mr DAVIDSON: Were any penaltiesincluded in the letting of the tender for thiscontract?

Ms ZELLER: When you say "penalties"?

Mr DAVIDSON: For non-performance?Ms ZELLER: There is a requirement that

they deliver an application that complies withthe specifications. We are logging problems asthey occur with the system and they arebasically remedying those problems as theyare logged and as they occur. To the extentnecessary, that is, I suppose, a penalty. Asyou would find ordinarily with commercial


partners under a contract, these difficulties arebeing worked through in a productive way.

Mr DAVIDSON: You say that you had athree-month guarantee on this system. Whenwas it delivered to the department and is theguarantee still current? Will it continue to becurrent with the non-performance of thesystem?

Ms ZELLER: The guarantee continuesthrough to the end of October. Hence theimportance of any problems being effectivelylogged. In respect of those problems that arenot corrected during the three-month period,we would still have the benefit of the three-month warranty applying to have thosecorrected. I should also mention that theintroduction of the BACHCO system is a two-stage one, with the second stage relating toincorporated associations, cooperatives andcharities. That is due to come on line in lateNovember/early December. Similarly, there willbe a three-month warranty attaching to thatphase of the introduction. We certainly havethis ongoing relationship where we would belooking at having problems corrected.

Mr DAVIDSON: I should imagine they willhave their fingers crossed. In your response toour first question on notice about consultantsand their use by your department, no mentionis made of a project and report you presentedin the House undertaken and produced by PhilDickie on behalf of your Department of FairTrading. The project and subsequent reportreferred to the matter of marketeer operationson the Gold Coast. Why is there no indicationin the answer given of this consultancy, howmuch was Mr Dickie paid for this endeavourand report, and why was such a reportnecessary when your Southport officeinvestigators had all of their investigations onthese matters complete and reports preparedprior to the commencement of Mr Dickie'sproject?

Ms SPENCE: I understand that thereason that Mr Dickie's work for thedepartment was not listed as a consultancywas that he was put on as a contractemployee of the department for his time withthe department. I reject the statement that theSouthport Office of Fair Trading had all theseissues covered. There was certainly no reportto me or to the department about the activitiesof the two tier property marketing system thatoperates in Queensland until I drew thedepartment's attention to the problems thatthis was creating.

That is not to say that the Southportofficers of Fair Trading were unaware of the

problem, were not concerned about theproblem or had not done some investigationsof the problem. However, they, like mostofficers of Fair Trading around the State, areoverworked. Particularly on the Gold Coastthere has been a need for more investigatorsfor some time. The number and the volume ofcomplaints and the seriousness with whichthese complaints needed to be investigatedmeant that many of them simply had notreceived attention. That is why we haveallocated in this year's budget funds to appointfive new officers to the Southport office.Indeed, that is why we put on Mr Phil Dickie toprepare an investigative report on the activitiesof the two tier property marketing system onthe Gold Coast.

Mr FENLON: I note from the MPS onpage 2-7 that considerable funds have beenallocated to the establishment of aninvestigative squad to detect the practice oftwo tiered marketing in Queensland. Could theMinister please advise the Committee of thesteps your department is taking to crack downon these unscrupulous operators who arethreatening to sully the reputation of theState's property industry?

Ms SPENCE: Total funding of almost$500,000 has been approved for this 12-month project. The Premier announced theproject in Parliament. It is the creation of aspecial task force of investigators who will lookat the complaints that the department hasreceived about the activities of the two tierproperty marketers. As we have alreadymentioned, I have taken a lot of time this yearand certainly a lot of the department's time toinvestigate the activities of these unscrupulousoperators. Not only have we had the reportthat was prepared by the investigator PhilDickie, we have also had a report that wasprepared by a working party that Iconvened—a working party made up ofmembers of the industry as well as consumerrepresentatives—who have recommended tome legislative changes that are needed tostop the activities of the two tier propertymarketers. As well, we undertook to engagethe services of Mr Bill Duncan, who is aprofessor at Queensland University ofTechnology and is one of the leading realestate experts in this State, indeed, in thisnation. He has also delivered us a report of thelegislative changes that are needed in thisState.

As well, I am preparing the changes tothe Auctioneers and Agents Act. Thedepartment is working very hard on that. Thefirst stage has gone through Cabinet. I expect


to deliver that Act to Parliament early in thenew year after we have gone through a properconsultation period with industry and withconsumers. I believe that there are a numberof measures we can take to deal withunscrupulous marketers and developers.These will form part of the legislative changesthat we bring to Parliament next year.

Mr FENLON: I note from the MPS onpage 2-8 that you plan to review the MobileHomes Act. More and more people are optingfor this style of accommodation, particularlyhere in Queensland. Could the Minister pleaseadvise the Committee what action you aretaking to inform mobile park residents of theirrights?

Ms SPENCE: There have been increasingcalls on Government to review the MobileHomes Act of 1989. At present 10,000Queenslanders live in mobile home parks.They reside in 160 parks throughout the Stateand there have been a number of concernsabout rising rents. Residents have been forcedto abandon their homes without recoupinganything near the purchase price. There areproblems about the definition of "mobilehomes" and the legislative protection that isafforded these residents. There are problemsconcerning the rights and obligations of parkowners. We have concerns about harsh andunconscionable purchase agreements. Wehave concerns about overcharging orinadequate supply of water and electricity,deteriorating facilities in parks and a lack ofconsultation on park rule changes.

I also find in going out and talking tomobile home residents that there aredifficulties for them in understanding theirrights and responsibilities under the Act. Thatis why the department has been working withthe Caxton Legal Centre and has recentlylaunched a booklet called Going Mobile: aGuide to Mobile Home Living, which is a veryclear and forthright explanation of not only therights and obligations of residents in parks butalso owners of parks. A lot of the difficultiescan be overcome by this sort of clearexplanation. We are looking at producing avideo as well to give to mobile home residentsto help them understand these rights andobligations. But in the meantime we arereviewing the Act and I hope to make thenecessary legislative changes to the Act to beintroduced to Parliament in the next year.

Mr FENLON: Could the Minister pleaseadvise the Committee what steps she is takingto strengthen the financial position of theAuctioneers and Agents Fidelity GuaranteeFund as referred to on page 2-4 of the MPS?

Ms SPENCE: An audit of the Auctioneersand Agents Fidelity Guarantee Fund wasauthorised by the director-general on 9 June tomeet departmental accountabilityrequirements. After a select tender process, inaccordance with the State Purchasing Policyrequirements, a group of accountants orauditors were appointed to conduct theinternal audit. The cost was approximately$12,500.

There has been a deterioration in thefund over the last nine years or so—ever sincethe Government started withdrawing $9.8mfrom the fund each year to give as a grant tothe Department of Housing. This is somethingthat has occurred not only under LaborGovernments but also under coalitionGovernments. Obviously you cannot keepwithdrawing $9.8m from a fund in a time of lowinterest rates without having somedestabilising effect on the fund.

As a result of the audit report, we arehaving ongoing discussions with Treasury tolook at the future of the fund. I have to saythat the Department of Fair Trading does notmake the decision to withdraw the $9.8m togive to Housing each year; that is a decisionthat is made ultimately by Government andTreasury. Nor do we administer the fund; thatis administered by Treasury. What we doreceive is an allocation from the fund eachyear. That allocation goes to pay the claimantswho are successful in making claims on thefund. It also funds the Auctioneers and AgentsCommittee and it also funds a certain numberof our departmental staff who work as asecretariat of the committee and who areinvestigators primarily to investigate activitiesunder the Auctioneers and Agents Act.

The CHAIRMAN: Would you be able toadvise the Committee of the success orotherwise of claims against the Auctioneersand Agents Fidelity Guarantee Fund, bearingin mind that this fund exists for the purposes ofhelping consumers in Queensland seekfinancial redress?

Ms SPENCE: Yes. During 1998-99 therewere 358 claims made on the fund, to a totalvalue of $1,329,207. This compares with 307claims made in the previous year, 1997-98.The claims in that year totalled $959,511.While there were 100 claims against motordealers for $279,280, real estates representedthe major source of claims, with 229 claims fora total of $765,727. In this last year thecollapse of three real estate agencybusinesses contributed to the significantvariation in the value of the real estate relatedclaims. As well, there were five receivers


appointed during 1998-99, compared with onein the previous year. As at 30 June 1999 feesto the value of $17,925 have been submitted.

I think it is interesting to gain anappreciation of the kinds of people who makeclaims against the fund and who aresuccessful in gaining compensation from thefund. In the last quarter, 17 claims were madeby consumers who were misled by real estateagents. Eleven claimants were unsuccessful intheir claims against real estate agents. Twenty-six claims were made by consumers who weremisled by motor dealers. Ten claimants wereunsuccessful in their claims against motordealers.

The CHAIRMAN: Consumer educationdominates sections of the MPS. Iacknowledge the importance of keeping thepeople of Queensland informed of their rightsand responsibilities as consumers. With this inmind, could you please advise the Committeeof any action the department has taken orplans to take to keep consumers abreast ofthe latest information and make them moreaware of their rights as consumers?

Ms SPENCE: I am pleased to report that,even though we are operating in a tightfinancial budgetary position, we havemanaged to increase the amount that is spenton consumer education in the Department ofFair Trading. The budget for consumereducation for this last year was $373,000. Thisyear it will be $550,000. I happen to think thatconsumer education is one of the mostimportant roles of a fair trading department. Iam very impressed with the activities of ourconsumer education section and thedepartment generally.

I think all members would be familiar withour much valued Age-wise kit, which isrequested and used by members ofParliament at all times, and indeed has beenused by Liberal members of Parliament in theircampaigning material in the past. This year wehave done more. We have produced a newmillennium bug awareness campaign whichinvolved brochures. We have Millie, themillennium bug, a cartoon-type figure, who isout there in shopping centres, schools andcommunity groups, trying to make peopleaware of the impact of the millennium bug.She has a limited lifespan now, so she is verybusy until the end of the year.

For the first time this year on ConsumerRights Day we conducted a student artscompetition. That was very successful inschools throughout Queensland. We have, asI mentioned, developed the information

booklets on mobile homes. We haveredeveloped the Office of Fair Trading website. We have run a series of travel agentsseminars and have produced a booklet forinbound tourists. We have developed a lectureseries for the International Year of OlderPersons and we have had a marketing forum.

The department is currently preparing abooklet on consumer issues to be given toschool leavers. That will be ready for the endof the year because we believe that the timeyoung people are leaving school is the timethey will become very active consumers in themarketplace. I am looking forward to thelaunch and the distribution of the new schoolleavers kits. We have a number of activitiesplanned for the following year. I take thisopportunity to congratulate the department onthe wonderful job they are doing in informingQueensland consumers.

The CHAIRMAN: Would you be able toadvise the Committee of the role of the trademeasurements section of your department,which is referred to on page 2-8 of the MPS? Itis referred to as having carried out tens ofthousands of inspections. What exactly arethese inspections, who are these "consumercops", what is their role and how doconsumers benefit?

Ms SPENCE: It is good to be given theopportunity to talk about our trademeasurement officers because they in manyways are the quiet achievers in thedepartment, although they have not been soquiet this year. They have been featured onnational television for the great work that theydo. They have been labelled the consumercops by the media. They operate in Brisbaneand our seven regional centres. They areassociated with measuring and weighingeverything that we use, from petrol pumps todrink measures in pubs to the scales inbutcher shops and those used to weigh fish.They measure the distance in athleticsevents—to see whether the 100 metres isreally 100 metres.

In this last year they have visited 5,694premises throughout Queensland. They haveundertaken 11 prosecutions, all of which weresuccessful. They have issued 40 infringementnotices. They have investigated 312complaints. Ninety of those were found to bejustified. They have measured for accuracy13,479 measurements. Eighty-eight per centwere found to be correct. They have checkmeasured 35,000 articles. Ninety-one per centwere found to be correct.


It has been said to me that the fair tradingmeasurements section in Queensland isperhaps the finest in Australia. It is nice to seethat the former Minister, Mr Beanland, isagreeing with me here. Indeed, other Statesand countries use the services of our fairtrading officers to measure various things. Ialso take the opportunity to congratulate theseofficers, the consumer cops, for the work theydo. Often these people operating in regionaland rural Queensland are out there on theirown in a car. They are going into premiseswhich might be hostile, where people do notwant their measurements checked. They reallyare at the forefront of consumer protection forall Queenslanders.

Ms NELSON-CARR: Earlier this year youtold Parliament that you intended to taketough action against the practice of predatoryloan sharks who have been preying onvulnerable people in the Queenslandcommunity, providing quick-fix loans and thencharging exorbitant interest rates and in someextreme cases using standover tactics to gainpayment. Could you please inform theCommittee what action your department hastaken to curb the worst excesses of fringecredit providers?

Ms SPENCE: For the first time ever, Ibelieve, the department undertook aninvestigation into the activities of fringe creditproviders in March this year. Fringe creditproviders are individuals who loan money topeople who are unable to access creditthrough mainstream financial institutions suchas banks, building societies and so on. Theyare operating as loan sharks and we had anumber of complaints about their activities.

Unfortunately, the kinds of people whotake money from these individuals are notnecessarily the types of people who want tolaunch complaints, so we ran a week-longStatewide phone-in in which consumers wereable to complain or just give us informationabout the activities of these fringe creditproviders. We received 99 responses. Fifty-sixrelated to loan sharks and 23 related to carfinances. As a result of the report, which Itabled in Parliament, the Office of Fair Tradinghas launched Supreme Court legal actionagainst 12 loan sharks for breaches of theconsumer credit laws, which are administeredby the Fair Trading Department. We are alsolaunching action against possible breaches ofthe Fair Trading Act.

The legal action against the loan sharks isgoing to be quite expensive. Already, thedepartment has spent in the order of $50,000on legal expenses, and the total cost of

litigation is expected to be in the order of$100,000 to $150,000. It should be noted thatthe costs of the legal action are drawn fromthe Consumer Credit Fund. But as part of thelegal proceedings against the loan sharks, thedepartment will be seeking fines against eachof the 12 loan sharks for amounts of up to$50,000 each. Any fines awarded by the courtwill be paid back into the Consumer CreditFund.

Ms NELSON-CARR: Minister, you alsotold Parliament recently that, as a parent, youwere concerned about the case in whichchildren can access pornography on theInternet. Speaking as a parent myself, whataction is the department taking to shieldchildren from violent, pornographic, unsuitableand unsavoury sites on the Internet?

Ms SPENCE: I am sure all members areconcerned about the easy access childrenhave to pornography and other dangerousinformation such as bomb making on theInternet. I am approached about this subjectfrequently by parents and by the media. It isdifficult to legislate in this regard. We took theposition that we could at least informQueensland parents of some activities theymay undertake to limit their children's accessto the Internet. I had heard that there were anumber of pornography filters out there thatparents can buy, but I appreciate that allQueensland parents were not aware of theavailability of such measures. We decidedthen to put out a fact sheet calledUnderstanding the Basics of InternetPornography Filters. It has been very wellreceived. We have had an enormous numberof requests from members of Parliament of allpolitical persuasions, as well as schools andcommunity groups, for those particular factsheets. They have been one of the mostsuccessful and popular publications of thedepartment in the past year. That is part of theconsumer education program that ourdepartment feels is just so important.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, I refer you to thefirst edition of the Employee RelationsNewsletter of April this year, which states thatyou are committed to the improvement ofworkplace conditions and to addressingworkplace health and safety issues. Is this infact the case? Given this commitment, how doyou explain the problem of which I have beenadvised in relation to the airconditioning onfloor 28 of the State Law Building which, asyou would be aware, is the location of thefinance section of the Office of Fair Trading?This problem has seen office temperatures riseto above 28 degrees Celsius, causing great


distress to at least two pregnant workers andone worker who suffers from asthma. Yetdespite numerous complaints from theworkers, including to the DGs office—which, Imight add, told staff they could not help themdue to Estimates preparation—the problemhas gone unresolved.

Ms SPENCE: There is no floor 28 of theState Law Building. I understand the buildingstops at 25. So I do not know where thesepeople are working.

Mr DAVIDSON: What about the financesection of your department in the Office of FairTrading? Is there a problem there with abroken-down airconditioner—with temperaturesrising above 28 degrees because theairconditioning is not working properly, and withstaff in the department feeling greatdiscomfort, particularly two pregnant workersand one suffering from asthma?

Ms SPENCE: I have not heard aboutthose problems, but obviously I would be veryconcerned. I will ask the acting commissionerto comment on that matter.

Ms ZELLER: It had been brought to myattention that there were ventilation problemson the 23rd floor, where the finance area islocated. My understanding is that technicianslooked at it and that there was a problem withthe vents and that had been corrected. So mylatest information was that the vents wereworking correctly.

Mr DAVIDSON: Has there been anongoing problem for some time with theairconditioning on that floor?

Ms ZELLER: I can only speak from myown knowledge. It had only been brought tomy attention within the last couple of weeks,and that was followed very quickly with theinformation that the vent problem had beencorrected.

Mr DAVIDSON: It appears that some ofthe staff are very concerned about the factthat it has not been corrected, particularly thepregnant women and the person who suffersfrom asthma.

Ms ZELLER: I understand that part of theproblem relates to the fact that the originalvent outlets in that building were in a certainconfiguration and that partitions over the yearshave been put in place that do not necessarilycomplement the airflow. That is somethingthat, certainly, we will be continuing to address.

Ms SPENCE: Mr Chairman, I have justreceived a reply to the question which we tookon notice concerning the registrationapplication before. I do not want to use up the

member's time, but when would it beappropriate to respond to that—now or at theend of the Estimates?

The CHAIRMAN: At the end of Estimatesis fine by me.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, as you statedbefore, there has been an audit of theAuctioneers and Agents Fidelity GuaranteeFund. In relation to this audit, what was thetotal cost of the audit and who conducted it?When will you make the results of this auditpublicly available?

Ms SPENCE: I think I mentioned in myanswer before that the total cost of the auditwas $12,500. It was put out to tender inaccordance with the State Purchasing Policyrequirements. The successful tenderer wasWorrell Whitehill, chartered accountants. Ihave received the results of that audit onlyvery recently. I intend to fully discuss theresults of the audit with Treasury before I makethem publicly available. I have no problem withmaking them available—tabling them inParliament or whatever—down the line, butuntil such time as I have briefed my colleaguesproperly on that audit, I will wait till then.

Mr DAVIDSON: So you are consideringmaking it publicly available?

Ms SPENCE: It will be publicly availableanyway through FOI. Once I have done theproper discussions on it, I am happy that it betabled.

Mr DAVIDSON: That is not really publiclyavailable. Are you going to release it publicly?

Ms SPENCE: Yes, I am happy to tablethat when it is appropriate.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, given yourmuch-publicised dislike for Ms Jackson,someone whom you have publicly labelled asunprofessional and unhelpful, what are thecircumstances regarding her position asManager, Investigations in the Office of FairTrading? Has her recent forced removal andredeployment not been a simple political get-square on your behalf? And how do youexplain the fact that both Ms Jackson and MrLawson—two people who were stronglyopposed to the payment of compensation toMr Bill Kelly—have both been removed fromtheir respective positions in the past sixmonths?

Ms SPENCE: Mr Chairman, I totally rejectall the premises behind that question. Theyare not true. They are part of this member'sattempts at cheap political grandstanding. I donot believe that they are necessarily part ofthis Estimates program. They are human


relationship matters within my department, andI am not going to sit here today and discussthe contractual relationship of all the membersof my department.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, the performanceand activities of the Auctioneers and AgentsCommittee as required by the Auctioneers andAgents Act falls within your responsibilities. Asyou would be aware, licensed motor dealers,before they can be licensed, are required bythe Act to provide proof of the premises, whichincludes local authority zoning approval andwhich meets the standards required forpremises, as set out in the Auctioneers andAgents Act. Why was a motor dealer's licenceapproved even though the premises thisapplicant intended to trade from was aresidential property—albeit with conditionalapproval—at North Maclean, by theBeaudesert Shire Council, when suchpremises clearly did not meet the standardsrequired by the Act?

Ms SPENCE: I have no knowledge of thatparticular case to which the honourablemember is referring. I am happy to take thatquestion on notice. But I would ask thehonourable member what his policy position ison this, because when the Liberal Partyrewrote the Auctioneers and Agents Act andfailed to get it passed in Parliament, one of theproposed changes that they made in the Actwas to remove the requirement on premisesfor motor dealers. Does he now suggest thatwe should keep that in our rewrite of the Act,or should we be removing it? It is inappropriateto have that requirement in an Act of thisnature. It is certainly a policy position that I amcurrently discussing with industry generally. Aswe have never had any policy positions fromthis member on the Auctioneers and AgentsAct, I am looking forward to hearing somepolicy from him further down the track.

Mr DAVIDSON: Our policy was left on thetable at the rising of the last Parliament whenwe were in Government. Our policy on theAuctioneers and Agents Act is quite clear.Your responsibility is to administer the Act as itstands today, not in relation to any futurechanges which you may make to the Act, orany future changes that you may bring to theParliament. I asked you why this motordealer's licence was approved. If you are notable to answer the question, you might havesomeone here who can answer it. Thepremises from which it was intended to tradewas a residential property. Under the Act as itstands it is not permissible to do that.

Ms SPENCE: If the honourable memberunderstood the Act at all, he would understand

that licensing under this Act is a matter for theAuctioneers and Agents Committee. One ofthe reasons why the committee spends somuch time meeting is because it approvesevery real estate agent's and every motordealer's licence in the State. The committeedoes not report to me with its decisions.However, I am happy to ask for an explanationfrom the committee about that particularlicensing decision.

I have asked generally for a report fromthe committee this year and I expect to havethat in the next month or so. I have taken anactive interest in the committee's work, which ismore than can be said for the former Ministerfor Consumer Affairs who sits at the table onthis Committee today. While he was Ministerhe did not ask for, or receive, any annualreports from the Auctioneers and AgentsCommittee. In fact, it seems that thecommittee only reports under LaborGovernments. So little has the coalition beenconcerned with the activities of the committeethat it did not even ask for annual reports. Thatis not going to be the case this year.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, as you shouldbe aware, the Auctioneers and AgentsCommittee, using its statutory powers underthe Act, has directed your officers tocommence proceedings to recoup the amountawarded to Mr Bill Kelly, after representationswere made to the Auctioneers and AgentsCommittee by his daughter Raylene Kelly,from motor dealer Mr Frank Benussi. Howmuch money is involved in this claim and howmuch of this claim has been recouped from MrBenussi?

Ms SPENCE: I understand that inNovember 1998 the committee agreed togrant Mr Kelly $6,700 compensation for hisclaim. The committee met on two furtheroccasions to review that decision. On eachoccasion the committee reaffirmed the initialdecision and Mr Kelly has received hiscompensation of $6,700.

Mr DAVIDSON: My question was: whataction had been taken by the Auctioneers andAgents Committee to recoup the money fromMr Benussi?

Ms SPENCE: I am just trying to seewhether any of our officers can comment onthat matter. I will pass it over to the actingcommissioner for a response.

Ms ZELLER: My understanding is thatdebt recovery proceedings have commenced.A letter of demand has been sent to MrBenussi. The procedures which are usual insuch recovery proceedings will be followed.


Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, I refer you tonote 12 on page 2-26 which states that thereis to be a $2m administered payment made bythe Department of Equity and Fair Trading tothe Queensland Building Tribunal. What is thenature of this payment? Can you confirm thatthere is to be a $1.8m allocation to the QBTfrom the QBSA budget in the 1999-2000financial year?

Ms SPENCE: Could you repeat thatquestion?

Mr DAVIDSON: I refer to the note whichsays that there is to be a $2m administeredpayment from the Department of Equity andFair Trading to the Queensland BuildingTribunal. What is the nature of this payment?Can you confirm that there is to be a $1.8mapplication to the QBT from the QBSA budgetin the 1999-2000 financial year?

Ms SPENCE: I might pass thatexplanation over to Mr Haralampou.

Mr HARALAMPOU: The matter of the$1.8m was the tribunal's allocation from lastyear and the $2m is the allocation for thetribunal for this financial year, the differencebeing that prior to 1 July the tribunal wasfunded directly, under the QueenslandBuilding Services Authority Act, from thegeneral fund of the Queensland BuildingServices Authority. Since the tribunal'sestablishment, the tribunal's financial figuresand transactions have been conductedthrough the finance department of the BuildingServices Authority.

On 1 July, changes were made to assistin the independence of the tribunal from theauthority, and the finances of the tribunal weremoved to the Department of Equity and FairTrading. The allocation that is coming from theDepartment of Equity and Fair Tradingcomprises the finances of $2m which arebeing paid by the Queensland BuildingServices Authority to the Department of Equityand Fair Trading, and then to the tribunal. Sothe total allocation for the Queensland BuildingTribunal is the $2m which has been allocatedfrom the general fund of the QueenslandBuilding Services Authority's budget.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, given yourmemorable comment regarding the QBSA andbudget deficits which were reported inBusiness Queensland on 4 September1998—which include this pearl of wisdom,"The practice is not sustainable. We cannotallow the BSA to continue to operate at thesevery large losses"—why is it that you arebudgeting an operating deficit of over $2m forthe financial year 1999-2000?

Ms SPENCE: An operating deficit ofwhat?

Mr DAVIDSON: Why is it that you arebudgeting for an operating deficit of over $2mfor this financial year?

Ms SPENCE: I am surprised that thehonourable member wants to go down thetrack of looking at the BSA's finances andallowing me an opportunity to comment on theappalling financial management of theBuilding Services Authority which occurredprincipally during the coalition Government'sterm of office. It was while the coalition was inGovernment that increasing demands weremade on the Building Services Authority.

I guess all Queenslanders remember thegreat promises that were made by Liberalmembers of Parliament—particularly themember for Nerang, and others—about howthey were going to reform the Queenslandbuilding industry and guarantee security ofpayment for subcontractors. The coalitionfailed to deliver on all of those promises. Whatthe coalition did was ask more and more of theBuilding Services Authority. The coalitionrequired the authority to put on more staff andoperate more regional offices withoutexpanding the budget of the authority andwithout addressing the need to fully fund theauthority.

It was during the coalition's term in officethat the authority got into the financial positionwhich caused it to go to Treasury and ask for$3m for operating costs. I understand that theTreasurer at the time, Mrs Sheldon, said, "Youcan't have $3m, but we will give you $1.5m outof consolidated revenue to help you with youroperating costs." When I became Minister andsaw this, I realised that it was a position whichwas not sustainable. This is meant to be anindependent statutory authority.

The Government immediately set aboutthe task of addressing this particular problem.Over the last 12 months, I, as Minister, and mycolleagues, have had a careful look at theactivities of the Building Services Authority andwe have successfully introduced legislation intothe Queensland Parliament which will not onlyprovide the authority with a sound financialfooting for the future, but will also deliver lawswhich will improve the financial accountabilityof Queensland's 46,000 subcontractors andlicence holders. It will also afford Queenslandconsumers better protection. With respect tothe specific financial question that you posed, Iwill pass over to the authority manager, MattMiller.


Mr MILLER: Thank you, Minister. Thedeficit of just over $2m is primarily attributableto a forecast deficit in the insurance fund for1999-2000 of some $2.1m. That deficit, as Isaid, is in the insurance fund, which is a verysignificant business arm of the authority. Itinevitably goes through peaks and troughs.Because it is a not-for-profit scheme, someyears it makes money; other years it does not.The $2m deficit in 1999-2000 is almost inentirety due to delays in introducing the newpremium structure, which the Government hasintroduced effective 1 October. Some $2m, infact, was lost through the delay from notintroducing that from 1 July. The othersignificant contributor to the loss in theinsurance scheme for 1999-2000 is, in fact, anunforeseeable impact of GST liability, for whichthe authority is liable to be paying since lastDecember.

The member might wish to note that, infact, the general fund, which is the fundresponsible for providing all non-insurancerelated insurances, is, in fact, budgeted tomake a small surplus in 1999-2000. It is thegeneral fund which is the fund that has beenmost subject to asset erosion over the pastthree to five years. So I reiterate that thegeneral fund will be forecast to make a smallsurplus. The insurance fund, within plannedestimates, is to make a loss in the current yearbut is forecast in subsequent years to be backin the black.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr Miller. Icall the member for Mundingburra.

Ms NELSON-CARR: On page 2-7 of theMPS, reference is made to the establishmentof a tribunal to hear disputes betweenretirement village residents and operators. Ihave spoken to a number of constituents whoare concerned about their parents' future.What assurance can the Minister offer themand can the Minister justify the expense ofestablishing a tribunal?

Ms SPENCE: I thank the honourablemember for the question. All members wouldbe aware that there have been demands onthe Government to rewrite the RetirementVillage Act ever since it was introduced intoParliament in 1988. That was the first time thatwe had ever seen legislation to coverretirement villages in this State and there havealways been problems with the Act. I am verypleased to announce that we have been ableto get agreement on the rewrite of this Actbetween operators and residents alike. Icongratulate all of those who were involved inframing a heads of agreement and assistingthe department in writing legislation that,

basically, has the support of Queenslanders.That legislation is currently before the House.

One of the hallmarks of the legislation isthe establishment of the retirement villagetribunal. This will impact on the department'sbudget and the approximate cost is set out inthe operation investment proposal financialimpact table, based on the commencementdate of 1 January 2000. It is estimated thatthe tribunal will cost $116,000 for the 1999-2000 financial year and will cost just over$200,000 per annum thereafter. After muchdiscussion the Government decided that wewould not levy retirement village residents orowners for the cost of this tribunal and that itwould be funded through consolidatedrevenue.

I am very pleased to say that the idea ofa retirement village tribunal has beenwelcomed enthusiastically, particularly byretirement village residents in this State. Weexpect that the tribunal will meet on 40occasions during a year and residents, orthose wanting to access the tribunal, will pay$50 to have a dispute heard, which is the kindof money that you would pay to have adispute heard in the Small Claims Tribunal.

Of course, the tribunal is just the thirdstage of a three-part dispute resolutionprocess in the Act. The first two stages requireresidents and owners/managers to resolvedisputes in house and use the disputemediation process. However, if mediation fails,for the first time in Queensland they will haveaccess to a dedicated retirement villagetribunal. We believe that this will be a very costeffective and successful process in settlingdisputes that currently residents cannot settlebecause they cannot afford access to thecourts.

Mr FENLON: I note that on page 2-7 ofthe MPS the department has taken action tooutlaw illegal market practices in respect ofintroduction agencies. Can the Minister informthe Committee of any legislative changes tosupport the Office of Fair Trading in theirendeavours to protect people who use datingagencies to search for their soul mate?

Ms SPENCE: I thank the honourablemember for the question because, over thepast five years, the Office of Fair Trading hasreceived 450 complaints relating tointroduction agents. The number of complaintshas been increasing each year, with 65complaints made in 1994 and 130 complaintsmade in 1998. We know that these complaintsrepresent just the tip of the iceberg. Peoplewho use the services of introduction agents


and who are disappointed by the quality of theservice or misrepresentation that might occurwhen using those services are not necessarilythe type of people who are likely to complainabout it because of, obviously, embarrassmentor whatever. So it is becoming an increasingproblem in Queensland.

At present introduction agencies are notlicensed. It must be the easiest thing in theworld to get a book and a photo album andopen up your doors as an introduction agencyin this State. In the past, we have tried todevelop codes of conduct with the introductionagencies that exist currently in Queensland. Iunderstand that they have also tried codes ofconduct in New South Wales and Victoria.Really, we have not had the agreement orsupport of the industry in establishing thosecodes of conduct. So far, Victoria is the firstand only State to have legislated forintroduction agencies.

I am pleased to say that we will introducelegislation to the Queensland Parliament earlynext year that specifically regulates theindustry. We expect that the legislation will notonly require for the first time introductionagencies to be licensed but also regulate theiractivities. For example, we are proposing that,in future, they will be allowed to take only 30%of the contract price up front before deliveringany services to their clients. This is not thecase now: they are taking 100% of theircontract price and then clients are really leftout in the cold as to whether they receive theservices that they have been promised fromthose agencies. As well, another importantconsumer protection will be the introduction ofa three-day cooling off period for all contracts.

That legislation is presently being written.It will soon go out for public comment.Obviously, it will add to the administrativeburden on our department. We expect thatadditional ongoing funding of approximately$150,000 and start-up funding of $40,000 willbe involved in this new legislation. However,we believe that it is important consumerprotection legislation. We are hoping that, aswell as the legislation, a public awarenessinformation campaign will fully informQueensland consumers and basically clean upthe introduction agency business.

Mr FENLON: I note on page 2-7 of theMPS that the Minister has undertaken a reviewof the Consumer Credit Code. Could theMinister advise the Committee of any benefitsof this review, particularly in relation to peoplewho need to borrow money in these times ofeasy credit?

Ms SPENCE: Thank you. You would beaware that the Consumer Credit Code isnational template legislation and Queenslandis the leading State in this. Basically, the otherStates adopt Queensland laws once they areenacted in Parliament. I understand thatStage 1 has been completed and we arecurrently in the second stage of the review,which involves a national examination of theConsumer Credit Code against NationalCompetition Policy principles to basicallyidentify and possibly reduce any restrictionsthat are determined not to be in the publicinterest. The second stage is commencing thismonth and is due to be completed by 30September 2000. The reviews are funded byeach State proportionally according to theirpopulation. Our contribution is 17% of the totalcost, which will be approximately $32,640.

Obviously, the Consumer Credit Code isnot necessarily a subject that everyone isexcited about. However, it is importantconsumer legislation. It is important that welook carefully at the code because it involvesthings like the activities of loan sharks. Oncethe delay that relates to the VictorianGovernment being in caretaker mode is putout of the way, the next review will commence.

Mr FENLON: Minister, could you pleaseinform the Committee of any innovations thatyou plan to implement since taking over theresponsibility for hostels and boarding housesin Queensland, which is referred to in the MPSat page 2-8.

Ms SPENCE: I like to give credit where itis due. At this point, I give credit to theprevious Government and the previousMinister, Mr Beanland, for establishing theHostel Industry Development Unit, which wasestablished in the Department of Justice whenhe was Minister. It has now been moved to theDepartment of Fair Trading, which administersthe unit.

It is important that we work with thisindustry. In many respects, it is an importantindustry for Queensland's homeless and mostmarginalised people. They operate on very lowprofit margins. We want to ensure that privatehostels remain economically viable in thisState, and we acknowledge that they do needsome assistance from Government in doingthat.

In March 1999, Cabinet endorsed theframework of a five-year plan to work with thehostel industry. This is being funded by anumber of Government agencies that all havean interest in housing such people. Theagencies include the Departments of Families,


Youth and Community Care, Housing andHealth, the Public Trust Office and theResidential Tenancies Authority. The totalbudget for the unit for this financial year is$420,000 and it currently employs four staff. Iunderstand that the strategic direction plan forthe industry has now been finalised afterextensive consultation. That strategic industryplan will be released for comment next month.

The CHAIRMAN: Minister, I refer you tosecurity of payment for subcontractors. Whatmeasures and reforms have you introduced toguarantee that security of payment?

Ms SPENCE: It is important that allQueenslanders understand that the newlegislation offers a range of reforms that aredesigned for security of payment forsubcontractors. There are a number offinancial measurements included in thelegislation just passed by Parliament. I mighthand the rest of this question over to theGeneral Manager of the Building ServicesAuthority, who I know would like to speak onthis issue in more detail.

Mr MILLER: The package of reforms thatthe Government introduced into Parliament ina first wave on 26 August embodies a range ofmeasures to address not only security ofpayment but also performance improvement inthe industry generally. The measures includemuch tougher licensing under the BSAcontractor licensing system. Within that set ofreforms particularly, much tougher financialviability requirements on contractors. The aimis to raise the level of financial viability ofcontractors and, I guess, improve the overallfinancial viability and profitability of theindustry.

Another very significant reform that isintroduced in that legislation is a requirementfor much fairer contracting conditions, andparticularly the introduction of prompt paymentrequirements for head contractors of 21 daysand subcontractors of 35 days. The aim is toimprove the payment flow down thecontractual chain and minimise the amount ofmoneys outstanding or at risk of contractorcollapse. A range of other measures aredesigned particularly to assist subcontractors inthe form of their ability to cease work. If theyare not being paid they are able to, forexample, limit their securities and retentions.Again, that is a measure designed to minimisetheir exposure in the longer term to non-payment. Those are some of the moreimportant issues.

Changes are occurring in the way that theGovernment sector does business. It

commissions about 40% of the work in thisState and it is changing its tenderingprocesses to role model how the industrymight behave in a more productive way. Theyare some of the key reforms that have beenincluded in the reform package.

The CHAIRMAN: Minister, as tourism isone of the State's biggest and most importantindustries, would you be able to advise theCommittee of any action you have taken tobetter inform inbound tourists of their rightsand responsibilities as tourists and consumersin Queensland?

Ms SPENCE: The Department of FairTrading, as well as the Department of Tourism,has been concerned that inbound touristshave a greater understanding of their rightsand responsibilities as consumers in Australia.Obviously, our laws are quite different fromthose in many of the countries from which theycome.

We have heard a number of disturbingstories of unethical practices that have beenused by some unscrupulous inbound touristoperators when dealing with tourists,particularly those with poor English languageskills. Some operators have seized passportsor prevented tourists from reboarding coachesuntil they have purchased goods at duty freeshops where the operators receive a financialkickback. We have heard stories ofovercharging and false information given toinbound tourists. The classic example is that ofthe vehicle hire company in Cairns that wasexploiting and overcharging inbound tourists. Ithas been recently prosecuted in the Cairnscourt. The story of the Jolly Frog is a disturbingone.

We have worked collaboratively with theDepartment of Sport to produce a brochurethat is available in three languages other thanEnglish, that is, Korean, Chinese andJapanese. The brochure will be distributedwidely at airports, local councils and otherareas where tourists have contact as part ofour education campaign for inbound tourists.This is important not only for individual touristsbut also for the image of Queensland as agood tourist destination. We believe it will begood for business in this State.

The CHAIRMAN: Minister, you told theCommittee earlier that there would besignificant benefits to industry as a result of thechanges to the Building Services Authority.Could you please inform the Committeewhether those changes would bring about anybenefits to consumers in Queensland inparticular?


Ms SPENCE: As the general managersaid, the reforms that we have recentlyintroduced are designed to assist in the issueof security of payment to subcontractors byputting our 46,000 licence holders on soundfinancial footing. When we talk about thebuilding industry, the group that is often notgiven enough attention is certainlyQueensland consumers. It is important forconsumers to know that the legislation thatgoverns this industry is indeed protecting themas well.

A number of important reforms in thelegislation will assist Queensland consumers.We have increased the insurance coverage toa maximum of $200,000. Previously, it wasonly $100,000. We have extended insurancecoverage so that it will be provided to ownersof high-rise residential units. We will have awider coverage of contractors who can provideinsurance coverage, rather than just builders.That will provide greater protection toQueensland insurers.

In addition, we have created a publicregister that includes details of proven disputesand actions against contractors, which can beaccessed by consumers before they choose acontractor. We will be posting on theInternet—and I believe that this will beoperational early next year—a list of the46,000 licence holders and whether in factthey have had any directions made againstthem in the period that they have beenlicensed by the BSA. This will be reallyimportant for Queensland consumers. Beforeyou sign a contract with a building company ora subcontractor, you will be able to go to theInternet, free of charge, and find out whetherin fact that subbie or builder has had anydirections made against them.

The CHAIRMAN: That is veryencouraging.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, in relation to theproposed retirement villages legislationcurrently before the Parliament, an amount ofjust $124,000 has been allocated in theBudget towards establishing the retirementvillages tribunal. Given the unease about thisproposed legislation in the retirement villageindustry, particularly from residents, thisamount seems hardly satisfactory for theoperation of this tribunal. Do you believe thatthis allocation will be sufficient to cover theoperation of the tribunal during the course ofthe 1999-2000 financial year?

Ms SPENCE: Yes, we do believe that.We have put quite a bit of effort into costingthe proposals for this tribunal. I am happy to

table the document that I have in front of me,which is a detailed financial impact table.Basically, we look at employee-related costs. Imight pass this over to the actingcommissioner to explain it in greater detail.

The CHAIRMAN: The Committee mayaccept that as additional information, butbecause of the obvious difficulty in having atable incorporated in Hansard it will not beincluded in the Hansard transcript.

Ms ZELLER: As was indicated by theMinister, the legal and policy officersconcerned, who have been involved in thedrafting process, researched this areathoroughly. The financial impact table basicallyparticularises the costs that make up thisproposed expenditure under the headings of"Output Impact" and "State Contribution toOutput Requested", which is the large part ofthe costs, totalling $205,000. Residents will beasked to make a $50 contribution to have theirparticular dispute heard. If it reaches the thirdstage of the process that was particularised bythe Minister, this equates to the cost ofbringing a matter before the Small ClaimsTribunal, so it is thought to be quite anequitable arrangement. But the large part ofthe cost will be paid by the Government and,although it seems to be a relatively modestfigure, it has been researched and it is thoughtthat it will be adequate to serve the needs ofthis tribunal. No doubt there will be anopportunity to review the operations of thetribunal once the legislation is in place and wewould be doing that, I would anticipate,certainly on an annual basis.

Ms SPENCE: As to one of the savingsthat we will be able to make in theestablishment of the tribunal, we are expectingit to share the premises currently used by theAuctioneers and Agents Committee and weare not going to be establishing new premisesjust for the operation of this tribunal.

Mr DAVIDSON: I expect that this tribunalwill be busy in the first three or four months.Minister, in relation to the employment of yourdirector-general, Ms O'Donnell, and theGovernment's additional employmentcommitment in providing travel outside ofdepartmental activities for the director-generalwhen she commuted backwards and forwardsto Melbourne in the initial days of herappointment, how many times did MsO'Donnell travel to and from Brisbane toMelbourne, how much was spent on thistravel, what other accommodations expenseswere involved in these trips and whatrelocation expenses were paid to your director-


general for her transfer to take up her duties inyour office?

Ms SPENCE: I understand that mydirector-general has those details and she cananswer that.

Ms O'DONNELL: The travel that Iengaged in was the travel to Brisbane to takeup my position when I started. Prior to that, Itravelled up to meet with the acting Director-General of the Premier's Department on oneoccasion. They are the only trips to and fromMelbourne in relation to my appointment.

Mr DAVIDSON: Were there any relocationexpenses?

Ms O'DONNELL: Yes, there were.

Ms SPENCE: We will have to get back toyou. We should be able to give you thespecific figures before the end of the session.

Mr DAVIDSON: I know that you failed togo through the purchaser/provider agreementreached between the Department of Justiceand the Board of the Residential TenanciesAuthority. Given that this arrangement was amethod to expedite dispute resolutions inassociation with conciliation and mediation,why did you fail to go through with this as partof the amendments to the ResidentialTenancies Act? What is the anticipated cost ofthe survey being conducted in association withthe Department of Justice? Has anyone beenengaged to perform this customer satisfactionsurvey? If so, whom?

Ms SPENCE: I am pleased to receive aquestion on the Residential TenanciesAuthority, because I know that Ms CarolynMason, who has been sitting here throughoutthis session, will be only too pleased to answerthe specifics of the member's question.

Mr DAVIDSON: That is why I asked.

Ms MASON: The payment of $1.25m wasto support the Department of Justice in theCivil Justice Reform Act. It was not actually partof the amendments to the ResidentialTenancies Act itself. When the currentGovernment came to power, the issue ofhaving the Small Claims Tribunal handling atenancy dispute was reviewed and the policydecision was made in that department that itwas not appropriate for a client of the justicesystem to be seen to pay for the justice thatthey received; that the courts' administrationprocess needed to be seen to be at a distancefrom any particular client group. In that regard,the payment was not made, because it wasseen that it was an inappropriate payment andthat one of the criticisms might have been thatjustice could be bought.

The particular sections of the Civil JusticeReform Act which established a separatetenancy division under the Small ClaimsTribunal have not been implemented on thegrounds that there was a proposal thatalternative views be looked at for improving thehandling of tenancy disputes. It was seen asimportant to understand how people who wereclients of the Small Claims Tribunal for tenancymatters viewed the actual dispute process,and that is why a survey is being done which isall funded by the Residential TenanciesAuthority. We let Justice off the hook for that.We saw that one of the key issues there wasconfidentiality, which is why we have engagedthe Office of the Queensland GovernmentStatistician—it has particular requirements ofconfidentiality under its Act—and we did not goto the market. I understand that the cost,depending on how many are in the sample,will be somewhere between $40,000 and$42,000.

Mr DAVIDSON: Minister, in April/May thisyear your department undertook what wastermed as a SWOT analysis as part of theOffice of Fair Trading operational reviewproject, which was further renamed the OFTRealignment Project. This project wasdesigned to flush out the perceived strengthsand weaknesses of the department from astaff point of view. The April summary ofresponse from Brisbane staff indicated that thestaff perceived the following to be theweaknesses and strengths of yourdepartment's operations: lack of cooperationbetween branches and sections, lack of staff,poor technology systems and equipment, poorlevel of communication between branches andsections, limited career paths, outsourcingcompetition, staff and resources, instability, loworganisational profile, quality of records heldand information provided to clients. These arevery serious staff misgivings that do nothing forstaff morale. Given the time, energy and effortof the planned working party that undertookthis review, what changes have taken place inyour department to correct the perceivedweaknesses and threats that your staff haveidentified?

Ms SPENCE: The negative results of theSWOT analysis basically reflect on the poormanagement under the previous Governmentand the fact that the Department of FairTrading had been let to run down and lowmorale had been allowed to develop.

Mr DAVIDSON: You had been there for ayear. You are not going to blame someoneelse?


Ms SPENCE: And there had been a lackof leadership. I spent the first year as theMinister in this department cleaning up themesses of the previous Government andintroducing legislation into Parliament that youpromised but could not deliver. In terms of theadministration of the department, we havemade a number of positive changes. I wouldlike to ask my director-general to comment onthose.

Ms O'DONNELL: I instigated the SWOTanalysis that the member referred to because,like all the other areas of the Minister'sportfolio, we felt that we needed to listen towhat staff had to say to us about ways toimprove the service delivery and to look atincreased cooperation not only within theOffice of Fair Trading but, in fact, to maximisethe advantages of being in a portfolio such asthis. So we were also looking at opportunitiesfor the Office of Fair Trading to liaise with theOffice of Women's Policy and the Departmentof Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policyand Development.

I did conduct a SWOT analysis which wasquite an exhaustive process involving manyhours of meeting with the staff. As you areaware, the staff had both positives andnegatives to say about how we were working. Imight add that after that analysis we theninvited stakeholder groups from the real estateindustry, motor traders and other consumergroups to ask them to give us feedback abouthow we were performing.

Basically, what we have done is thenlisted all the areas of concern. I have nowappointed a realignment team and have putone and a half dedicated officers to work onthat. We are now looking at positiondescriptions to see if people are actually doingwhat their positions are supposed to be doing.We are talking with each branch area to lookat savings that they can make, looking at waysof establishing links between differentbranches so that they can talk more helpfullytowards each other. I chair a changemanagement committee that meets roughlyonce a fortnight at which the actingcommissioner sits as well and where I meetwith my two project teams and otherstakeholders. We talk through what changesare occurring. We are very hopeful that thisprocess will lead to a much more streamlinedoperation.

Mr DAVIDSON: Given it is IndyCarnivalthis weekend and hundreds and thousands willbe on the Gold Coast, what initiatives has thedepartment undertaken to ensure that securityproviders involved in the IndyCarnival at

entertainment venues, hotels, night clubs andso on will be monitored by inspectors from yourdepartment?

Ms SPENCE: It is normal for ourdepartmental investigators to get out andcheck the licences of security providers at anypopular time, and we do that just beforeschoolies week and during schoolies week andat popular times during tourist placesparticularly and also in Brisbane whensomething major is occurring. I can assure youthat we will be doing so at Indy. We would bereluctant, though, to comment on theparticulars of what we might be planning. Wedo not want to flag our punches, as it were. Ican assure you that we will be there.

Mr DAVIDSON: I can appreciate that, butgiven the number of people who will be on theGold Coast and obviously the increase in thenumber of security providers, have extrainspectors and an overtime budget beenprovided for the functions they will need to beinvolved in on the Gold Coast this weekend?

Ms SPENCE: We will accommodate anyinitiatives within our existing budget, but I canassure you that there will be a presence fromthe fair trading inspectors in Indy as therealways is during periods of heightened activity.I understand that our inspectors were out therein force last year and there was 100%compliance for security providers' licences. Sobecause we are active and out there, I thinkwe are getting good results in most parts ofthe State.

Mr DAVIDSON: I just take you back to theBusiness Queensland article in which youmade another statement regarding the BSA.You said that it was unforgivable for the BSAto be in deficit and there was a need to coverBSA's funding in the Labor budget. Given thatyou feel it is unforgivable for the BSA to be indeficit, why are you allowing it to operate indeficit this financial year; where is yourGovernment's injection of funding, as youstated would be in your Budget, to cover theBSA's expenditure; and, given that thecoalition gave $1.5m to the BSA in the 1998-99 Budget, was this just sheer politicalgrandstanding or another broken promise? Icannot find any funding dedicated in yourbudget papers to the BSA.

Ms SPENCE: You are wrong to make theclaim that the BSA will be in deficit this yearand you are wrong to say that you gave a giftto the BSA of $1.5m. That is a debt which theBSA has incurred and will be repaying toTreasury over time. To talk about the specifics


of the BSA budget, I would like to ask thegeneral manager to comment.

Mr MILLER: I indicated that the deficitthat is foreshadowed for 1999-2000 is, in fact,in the insurance fund, which has verysignificant net assets and is able to withstandthat foreshadowed deficit. In fact, the fundmay prove to run in surplus if the GST impacton the industry proves to be as positive as ithas to date. The building activity levels aseverybody brings forward their housing andrenovation programs seems to be much higherthan was originally thought. If that is the case,the insurance fund may run at a small surplus.

I reiterate, though, that it is a businessfund. It is designed quite specifically to someyears run at a deficit and some years to run inthe black. It was run in 1998-99 at a surplus ofsomething like $1.4m. It is a not-for-profitscheme and it ought not to, in my view, beseen to be making a profit every year,otherwise we are no different to a privatesector provider.

The performance of the scheme isactuarially assessed annually. Notwithstandingthe recent high claims experienced, actuariescontinue to reaffirm the strong performanceand the financial viability of that scheme. Thegeneral fund of the authority will make a smallsurplus in 1999-2000 and this builds on betterthan budget outcomes, in fact, in the year justcompleted, 1998-99.

Ms SPENCE: Basically, I would just like toadd, since we have a little bit more time left, ifyou want to start pointing fingers—I have infront of me the figures of the cost of the GSTup until 30 September this year which havebeen incurred since the legislation wasintroduced in Federal Parliament on 2December. So in those nine months we havealready incurred an $800,000 liability for theGST alone to the insurance fund inQueensland. This is something we have notgone out and talked about, but I have nodoubt that Queensland consumers will soonstart realising that things like insurance arealready incurring a debt because of the GST.That is part of the financial problems of theBSA and, indeed, the insurance fund whichthis Government is left to solve.

Mr DAVIDSON: Absolutely. I remind youthat your own Premier signed off on the GSTarrangement with the Federal Government onbehalf of all Queenslanders. That is my time,Mr Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN: Earlier this year youorganised a campaign through metropolitanand regional newspapers to advise consumers

of a large number of unclaimed bonds held bythe Residential Tenancies Authority, which isfunded by the interest from those bondmoneys outlined in the MPS on page 4-3.Could the Minister please inform theCommittee of the benefits of the scheme forconsumers and the Government and thesuccess of that campaign?

Ms SPENCE: The Residential TenanciesAuthority, I understand, spent just over $4,000on the unclaimed bonds campaign. I think thatwas a wise expenditure given that the authoritywas holding $630,000 in unclaimed bonds,which represents about 5,000 cheques. Iunderstand they were only concerned aboutunclaimed bonds that they had been holdingfor longer than a 15-month period. So thatrepresents a significant number of unclaimedbonds.

The campaign was very successful andwe thank Queensland Newspapers generallyfor their assistance with this campaign. Thecampaign resulted in a lot of activity in theResidential Tenancies Authority. I understandthat in just one week the authority took 5,452telephone calls about the unclaimed bondsand paid out $22,000. All together after thecampaign, about $90,000 was refunded to thepeople of this State who were owed bondmoney. So it is still far short of the kind ofmoney that the authority is holding inunclaimed bonds. I understand that now theyare holding about $650,000 in unclaimedbonds. So it is important that the authority usesome of its money from time to time topublicise the existence of the bonds and thatwe, as members of Parliament, do all we canto encourage consumers to track down moneythat might be owed to them.

Mr FENLON: Other States have aprivatised insurance scheme for homewarranty insurance. I note with the passage ofthe recent Queensland Building ServicesAuthority Amendment Bill that you rejectedprivatisation as an option for the BSAmonopoly scheme. Why will consumers inQueensland now be better off than consumersin those other States?

Ms SPENCE: I thank the honourablemember for the question. As the generalmanager of the Building Services Authoritysaid earlier in this session, the insurancescheme in this State has always delivered highlevels of consumer protection at premium costand compares more than favourably withprivately provided warranty in other States. TheBSA's consumer protection performance seesconsistent levels of around 99%. The homewarranty scheme consistently has provided


comprehensive policy coverage, including no-fault subsidence cover and protection, evenwhere builders fraudulently misrepresent theirunlicensed status.

Because it is a statutory authority it doesnot have to make profits. Therefore, it is ableto offer best value for money compared withprivate sector schemes. Being a schemeestablished by the Government to protectconsumers, it also has a greater focus onassisting consumers, rather than profitmaximisation. As well, because of the stagedintervention processes involved, insurance isnot invoked only when dispute resolution hasfailed. The importance of not merely opting forcommercial settlements at the expense ofmaintaining work standards is another keyfactor supporting continuance of themonopoly.

The Government considered theprivatisation of this scheme. I understand thatwas a policy position supported by the coalitionwhen it was in Government. However, webelieve that it was far too early to privatise ourinsurance scheme, a scheme that has workedwell, particularly when the privatised schemesin other States are still in their infancy. Wewould want to wait for further evidence abouthow that privatisation is occurring in otherStates before we would want to go down thatpath.

Mr FENLON: I note that at page 4-4 ofthe MPS the Residential Tenancies Authoritylists as an expenditure item grants andsubsidies. Could you please inform theCommittee who benefits from these grantsand subsidies, bearing in mind the socialjustice platform of the Beattie LaborGovernment? Are vulnerable and needygroups assisted by these grants?

Ms SPENCE: There are a number ofcommunity groups in Queensland who benefitfrom the grants and subsidies that aredistributed by the Residential TenanciesAuthority. In the latest round of funding$90,000 has been disbursed to nineorganisations throughout Queensland. I willask the manager of the Residential TenanciesAuthority to talk about why it is felt necessaryto make grants of this nature and whatQueensland tenants stand to gain from thiskind of funding.

Ms MASON: The scheme is targeted tothose who are most in need of tenancyinformation. In particular, the RTA seeks tocomplement the existing community educationcampaigns that we have. We recognise thatsome of the disadvantaged groups do not

access those campaigns perhaps like you or Iwould. The schemes are particularly targetedat vulnerable groups. We are very pleased withhow they are provided to people from non-English speaking backgrounds—we have hadprojects in far-north Queensland withCentacare—and particularly young tenantsaround the State. The Youth Action Group hasprovided wonderful resources through the useof comics, which is a medium through whichthat target group will access information. Theyare not going to read it in a text form, so thecomic form is a very appropriate way. We havealso provided for tenants with intellectualdisability through a major grant to theEndeavour Foundation.

The feedback we have from communityorganisations is that it provides a very valuableresource and gets the information to thosewho need it. Part of our responsibility is toensure that all parties to a tenancy agreementunderstand their rights and responsibilities. Wesee it as an obligation to ensure that the mostdisadvantaged across the State receive thatinformation in a form that they will accessappropriately.

Ms NELSON-CARR: Minister, youmentioned steps you are taking to improve thefinancial viability of the Auctioneers andAgents Fidelity Guarantee Fund. Could yougive this Committee an overview of theBuilding Services Authority's financial state?

Ms SPENCE: As we have heardpreviously, the financial position of the BuildingServices Authority is much improved throughthe new legislation that has recently beenpassed through the House. Part of theimprovements in the authority will depend onthe surcharge that is being made on theinsurance fund. Obviously the main source offunding for the Building Services Authoritycontinues to be, as it always has been, fromindustry—from the licence fees from industry.However, Government decided that, as this isan authority that consumers benefit fromsubstantially as well, consumers would bearsome of the costs of ensuring the ongoingfinancial viability of the authority.

It is noteworthy, though, that the BuildingServices Authority in the past year hasdemonstrated prudent financial managementover its budget. It has achieved betteroutcomes. I am sure the general managerwould love to tell you about the increasedactivity of the authority in the last year under afairly static budget. The authority is doing morewith the same resources. They have had tomake some changes with their operations todo that. I as Minister am very impressed by the


measures they have undertaken in the lastyear to guarantee that.

I will be asking the new board of theBuilding Services Authority to keep a close eyeon the budget of that authority. Obviously asMinister it is my responsibility to sign off on thatbudget every year. The new board has aposition on it for a departmental officer—that isthe director-general—to serve as a member ofthat board so that I can be properly informedabout the authority's financial position and alsoabout policy decisions. As well, I intend tomeet regularly with the board chair and have aclose and productive relationship with thatboard so that we are all convinced that in factQueenslanders are getting a very good, cost-efficient, fiscally responsible service from theBuilding Services Authority.

I am conscious of the demands that havebeen made on the authority in former years bythe previous Government, which failed toaddress the funding problems that wereexperienced by the authority. The previousGovernment signed off on supportedrecommendations to double or triple thelicence fees of the 46,000 licence holders inQueensland. While it signed off in support ofthose recommendations, it never implementedthem. The financial position deterioratedbecause the previous Government would nottake the hard measures of addressing thatposition.

The CHAIRMAN: Last year you told theCommittee of the good work of the ClientServices Branch of the Office of Fair Trading.Can you again comment on the performanceof the Client Services Branch?

Ms SPENCE: Yes, I can. The ClientServices Branch, like the Building ServicesAuthority, has experienced an increase inactivity in the last year. The Client ServicesBranch provides telephone and counter inquiryservices as well as on-the-spot counterlicensing and registration services. It isresponsible for consumer complaints andinquiries as well as maintaining the variousdatabases of the Fair Trading Office.Telephone inquiries have increased, as has allactivity. I have to say: the officers who work onclient services in our department produce verygood results in all respects. As Minister I amconstantly surprised at the level of assistanceQueensland consumers receive from thisdepartment.

Our people investigate every complaintthat is given to our department. Whether ornot we actually have a role in investigating thatcomplaint in terms of our legislation, or even

any legislation covered by this Government,we help consumers. We act as mediators. Wetry to act as honest brokers in many cases.And everyone is helped from this department.We are actually delivering a high level ofservice to Queensland consumers, and I takethis opportunity of congratulating all theemployees of client services in our nineregional offices and the Brisbane office.

The CHAIRMAN: Minister, you have justinformed the Committee of grants given by theResidential Tenancies Authority. I understandthat the auctioneers and agents fund alsopays grants. Can you advise the Committee ofthis grants scheme?

Ms SPENCE: Obviously, it is important forQueensland consumers to be educated abouttheir rights and responsibilities in dealing withreal estate agents and motor traders, and wewould prefer to educate rather than deal withcomplaints when they come in. Therefore, wehave a grants program that comes out of theAuctioneers and Agents Fidelity GuaranteeFund. The last round of grants gave fundingtotalling $849,940 in grant moneys to variousorganisations throughout Queensland.

You might be interested in the kinds oforganisations that successfully received grantsfrom this fund. The Cairns Community LegalCentre got $221,000. Bridging the Gap JobHelp on the Gold Coast got $30,000. TheCaboolture Business Enterprise Centre got$112,000. The Aboriginal Co-ordinatingCouncil got $115,000. Dr Richard Dunlop ofBrisbane got $25,000 to develop schoolcurriculum materials for secondary schoolstudents titled Renting a Property, Getting aFair Deal. The Australian Property Collegereceived $15,000 for some research. TheREIQ received $40,000 to fund a half-day realestate trainer development centre. And theMigrant Resource Service of Townsville—themember for Mundingburra will be pleased toknow—received $43,000 to conduct somecommunity consumer education workshops.

The grants, I understand, are decided bya panel of people, and they are, as I said, animportant part of ensuring that the consumersof Queensland are fully educated in this area.We advertise these grants by placingadvertisements in the Courier-Mail andregional newspapers. And as I said, in thisround of grants 15 applicants received$849,000.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much,Minister. The time allotted for consideration ofthe Estimates of expenditure for the Ministerfor Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy


and Minister for Women's Policy and Ministerfor Fair Trading has now expired.

Ms SPENCE: Mr Chairman, do I actuallyget time to respond to those questions onnotice?

The CHAIRMAN: If you so wish.

Ms SPENCE: It is just that I would preferto do that while we can.

The CHAIRMAN: Okay.

Ms SPENCE: With respect to thequestion that I took on notice concerning theregistration application for Noosa Research—the business name—from the member forNoosa, I am informed that the registrationapplication was received on 24 September1999. The business was registered on 8October 1999. The business registrationnumber is 16924710. It was posted to PO Box234 Noosa Heads on or about 11 October.Thus, the business was registered within 11working days of its receipt by the Office of FairTrading, not the months to which the memberfor Noosa alluded.

In respect to the question that themember raised about the granting of a motordealer's licence to some dealer atBeaudesert—it is important for me to have thespecifics of the person to whom this licencewas allegedly granted, so that I can make aformal request to the Auctioneers and AgentsCommittee, and they will then provide detailsand particulars regarding this matter. That willtake some time. As you would be aware, theAuctioneers and Agents Committee does notmeet on a daily basis, but we will certainly getthat information to the member for Noosa. Andthe director-general would like to mention herrelocation costs.

Ms O'DONNELL: My total relocation costswere $4,410. That was mostly made up of twoair fares from Melbourne to Brisbane—onereturn, and the move to Brisbane—and therest was mostly uplift of furniture andtelephone installation costs, etc.

The CHAIRMAN: The time allotted for theconsideration of the Estimates of expenditurefor the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres StraitIslander Policy and Minister for Women'sPolicy and Minister for Fair Trading has nowexpired. On behalf of the Committee, I thankthe Minister and her portfolio officers for theireffort in preparation for today and theirattendance. The hearing is now suspended fora break and changeover.

Sitting suspended from 4.01 p.m. to4.15 p.m.


FAMILIES YOUTH AND COMMUNITY CARE;DISABILITY SERVICES

IN ATTENDANCE

Hon. A. M. Bligh, Minister for Families,Youth and Community Care andMinister for Disability Services

Mr K. Smith, Director-GeneralMr A. O'Brien, A/Director, Service Strategy

Ms R. Sullivan, Children's Commissioner

Ms B. Griffiths, Senior Policy Adviser

The CHAIRMAN: The hearings ofEstimates Committee G are now resumed.The next item for consideration is theproposed expenditure for the Minister forFamilies, Youth and Community Care andMinister for Disability Services. The timeallotted is three hours. For the information ofthe Minister and new witnesses, the time limitfor questions is one minute and for theanswers, three minutes. A single chime willgive a 15-second warning and a double chimewill sound at the end of these time limits. Anextension of time may be given with theconsent of the questioner. A double chime willalso sound two minutes after an extension oftime has been given. Sessional Orders requirethat at least half the time available forquestions and answers in respect of eachorganisational unit is to be allotted to non-Government members and that any timeexpended when the Committee deliberates inprivate is to be equally apportioned betweenGovernment and non-Government members.In accordance with Sessional Orders, theMinister is permitted to make an openingstatement of up to five minutes' duration.Again, a single chime will give a 15-secondwarning and a further double chime will soundat the end of that time limit. For the benefit ofHansard, I ask the departmental officers toidentify themselves before they first answer aquestion.

I now declare the proposed expenditurefor the Minister for Families, Youth andCommunity Care and Minister for DisabilityServices to be open for examination. Thequestion before the Committee is—


Minister, would you like to make a shortintroductory statement or do you wish toproceed directly to questioning?

Ms BLIGH: I would like to make astatement, thank you.

The CHAIRMAN: You have five minutes.Ms BLIGH: Mr Chairman and members of

the Committee, I would like to start by thankingmy department and senior officers for the hardwork that they have put in in putting thebudget and the Estimates material together.

This budget marks a watershed in thehistory of the Department of Families, Youthand Community Care. The budget ushers inthe most significant period of reform in thehistory of the department. Last year's budgetlaid the foundations for some badly neededchange. This budget allows us to drive thatreform home. The 1999-2000 budget willenable us to continue rebuilding Queensland'schild protection system. It will allow us tocontinue the funding revolution in disabilityservices and to deliver a safer and moresecure youth detention system.

When we came to Government I inheriteda department that was incrediblyunderresourced, with little direction and littlehope of change. The neglect of the previousGovernment presented us with a challenge torebuild this department so that Queenslandchildren and families receive the services theyneed. The former coalition Government notonly failed to take up this challenge, but itturned a blind eye to it.

Mr Chairman, I am proud to say that theBeattie Labor Government has taken thatchallenge head on. This year's budget will seean increase in funding for child protection ofalmost 50% over four years—the mostsignificant commitment by any QueenslandGovernment. Guided by the Forde inquiry andthe Beattie Government's child protectionreform strategy, we have committed anadditional $10m this financial year, building to$40m a year by 2002. This will see an injectionof $100m over that four-year period.

This year's budget will see the first fullyear effect of our Government's $30mincrease in disability funding for unmet needs.On top of the record $30m, this year's budgetcommits an additional $2.048m a year tosupport young Queenslanders through theMoving Ahead program.

This budget drives home reform and itinjects levels of funding that the previousGovernment did not even try to deliver. Itmarks a new beginning in the provision ofservices to Queensland families and childrenby my department. We can achieve this reformbecause we have spent the past 12 monthslaying the foundations for change. I would liketo thank my director-general and thedepartment as a whole for their hard work and


dedication over that 12-month period andbriefly outline some of our achievementsduring that time.

The Forde commission of inquiry into theabuse of children in our institutions was thebeginning of this reform. This valuable inquiryhas provided the necessary blueprint for thisand future Governments to ensure that theState becomes a better parent to the childrenwho are placed in its care. Our new childprotection legislation is in place to givepractitioners and the community the mosteffective and fairest legislative tools in thiscountry.

We have appointed a high-level ChildProtection Council to improve cross-Government and community coordination onchild protection matters. We have added 30additional child protection workers to the frontline in the last financial year. We have begunrebuilding the youth justice system through re-integrating youth justice back into the FamiliesDepartment. We have begun the process ofupgrading the youth detention centreinfrastructure. We are in the process ofestablishing three new youth justice services.We are reducing the detention of youngpeople in watch-houses. We have distributed$500,000 in youth crime prevention grants tocommunities to find local solutions to localproblems.

We have improved our response todomestic violence by funding 14 new courtsupport workers and introducing badly neededamendments to the Domestic ViolenceAct—with more to come. We have workedhard to start changing our culture, to open ourdoors to new ideas and to strengthen ourpartnership with the community sector. Wehave established the Child Care IndustryForum and developed a five-year plan so thatwe can tackle the issues that are facing childcare together with the industry and thecommunity.

In the area of disability we have madesome huge advances. We were forced torebuild the system from the ground up. Wehave developed a funding process fromscratch. We have developed the first registerof unmet needs in disability services. We haveapproved a new specialist agency to be calledDisability Services Queensland which is to belaunched in December. This marks a real shiftin Government priorities and delivers a keyelection promise.

The development of a new strategic planand the separation of disability services fromthe department have combined to trigger the

need to rethink the way that the Department ofFamilies, Youth and Community Caredelivered its services. As a result, thedepartment has begun realigning its resourcesto meet the new circumstances and to ensurethat it is ready to deliver the significant reformsset out by the Forde inquiry.

This year the reform will continue. Thenext 12 months will see 70 new permanentchild protection workers on the front line. It willsee the child protection legislation proclaimed.It will see a stronger Children's Commission inplace. It will see new youth detention centreinfrastructure in Brisbane and in Townsville. Itwill see the former residents of the ChallinorCentre in their new purpose-built permanenthome. It will see improved domestic violencelaws and the establishment of a newdepartment for disability services.

Mr Chairman, I am proud to have alreadydelivered so much needed change and I lookforward to the next 12 months of reform.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. Thefirst period of questions will commence withnon-Government members. I call the memberfor Indooroopilly.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, I refer to youranswer to question on notice No 8. Youmentioned this matter a few moments ago. Irefer to page 5 of the Ministerial PortfolioStatements. In regard to staffing numbers, youconfirm that there will be an increase of 22child protection staff in the financial year 1999-2000 and not the 70 which was claimed by thePremier at page 8 of his Budget Speech. Youalso mentioned that figure a few moments agoin your introductory remarks. You are sackingsome 48 temporary people. Why do youpersist in misleading the people ofQueensland by insisting that there will be anadditional 70 child protection workers added tothe front line when in fact the real number is22?

Ms BLIGH: I am very pleased to have anopportunity to answer this question and toaddress some of the confusion that has arisenabout the issue. I can confirm to theCommittee that there will indeed be 70 newpermanent front-line positions funded from thebudget. For the information of the Committee,I table a copy of an advertisement which willappear in national newspapers this Saturday,16 October. The advertisement calls forexpressions of interest for 70 positions whichwill be based in area offices right across theState. The figure in the MPS relating to theseadditional workers is misleading and I ampleased to have a chance to clarify it.


The fact that the overall increase for thisoutput is only 22 relates to a number offactors. Firstly, the figure in the MPS does notrelate only to front-line child protection workers;it includes the total staffing in that area,including an allocation of corporate servicesstaff. It also picks up temporary and casualpositions in not only child protection but acrossthat area of the department. As the membermay know, the staffing numbers that arerecorded in the MPS are actually calculatedusing the actual numbers of people employedfor the last two weeks of the financial year. Sothose figures relate to the employees whowere paid in that pay period of the last twoweeks of the financial year. They do not takean average of staff numbers across the wholeof the financial year.

I am sure that the member will appreciatethat it is often the case in any organisation thatas the end of the financial year looms andthere is excess money in staff budgets, that itis common practice for people to employcontract workers where appropriate andpossible. These workers are on contracts untilthe end of the financial year. This results in aninflated figure for staffing numbers.

I do not believe that this is the best waythat the MPS could actually give an impressionof what the staffing figures are for adepartment. It is not only an issue in mydepartment but it exists also in otherdepartments where the employment oftemporary and contract staff is quite acommon occurrence. I have asked thedirector-general to correspond with the UnderTreasurer about how this material is actuallyrecorded in the MPS in future. I think that it isimportant that these documents provide anaccurate, useful and effective picture. I do notthink that using one fortnightly pay periodnecessarily achieves that aim. For example,while the MPS records that pay period, in fact,in the last seven months the average staffingin that area of the department has been 952officers. That has ranged. In January this year,there were 906 officers in this area. By Junethere were 1,013. I think that you can see thatthere are significant fluctuations, even thoughthe average over that time is 952.

I can confirm for the Committee and forthe member that there will be 70 new,permanent front-line positions. But, of course,they will form part of the base and we willcontinue to have fluctuations above that baseas spare staffing money is available across theprogram area and from time to time contractemployees will be employed to take up theslack in that budget.

Mr BEANLAND: Is the Minister saying thatthe MPS is wrong? After all, Minister, it is yourstatement, not anyone else's. You preparedthis and it is certified by you. Are you sayingthat the information supplied in that isincorrect?

Ms BLIGH: No, I am saying that it doesnot give you what I believe would be a fairpicture of staffing profiles across thedepartment. The way in which the MPS isprepared not only for my department but alsofor other departments is that the figure that isrecorded there is an accurate and correctfigure of staff employed in allcategories—temporary, contract andpermanent—for the last two weeks of thefinancial year. So you have an accurate pictureof the staffing levels for that pay period. As aresult of the way in which the MPS recordsstaffing figures, what you do not have is anaccurate picture of the employment trendsacross a 12-month period.

Mr BEANLAND: Clearly, if you look at thetable that you have tabled in the statement,1,013 to 1,035, the difference is 22. Let mesay that it is not 70. You can come up with allsorts of excuses for it but, at the end of theday, clearly arithmetic is not your strong suit onthis particular item.

Ms BLIGH: I think what I can confirmagain for the Committee—and, as I have said,I have tabled the advertisement that will begoing into this week's paper—is that there willbe 70 new, permanent front-line childprotection workers. However, in addition therewill continue to be fluctuations in the staffingnumbers. I think that it is important tounderstand the kind of work that thedepartment does. It ranges right through theadministrative areas where a person might bebrought on for a three-month contract to docertain administrative tasks, say, associatedwith putting in place new informationtechnology, for example, where it is a time-limited job or project. In addition, we haveemployees who are contracted from time totime to work with specific young people whomight be on court orders, for example. Again,their work with that young person is for a time-limited period, depending on the nature of thecourt order that the young person is on or theparticular problem that they might have.

So a proportion of our staffing numberswill always be temporary and contract to copewith the temporary and contract nature ofsome of the work that we do. What isimportant to the ongoing capacity of mydepartment to meet the challenges of the newlegislation, the challenges that have been set


for us by the Forde inquiry and the challengeof meeting the needs of families and childrenwho need our care and assistance, is that weneed a solid increase on an incremental basisin our permanent base. What will be deliveredthrough this initiative of the Government is 70new, permanent workers. They will then formpart of the base. In addition, there will becontinual fluctuations in temporary andcontract staff.

If we are unable to find a better waythrough the Treasury process of recording thisdata, I would suggest that you will see theMPS figure next year recording somethingsignificantly in excess of the 1,013, simplybecause the last two weeks of the financialyear next year will show similar kinds offluctuations.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, that sounds tome like you have very poor planning in the wayin which you expend your funds. That is amatter for you. But at the end of the day, letme say that it seems from both the commentsthat you have made and from the answer toquestion No. 8 that many of those temporaryworkers who, in fact, were doing this front-linechild protection work will not be on board thisfinancial year. They were temporary and someof those 48 whom you are sacking, in fact, aredoing this work.

Ms BLIGH: Some of those 48 may wellhave been doing some child protection work,others of the 48 would have been doingadministrative work—some of the others wouldhave been doing a very wide range oftasks—because that figure records staffingacross the whole program area; it is not simplya record of staffing levels of child protectionworkers. The entire child protection front line inthis State is approximately 350 staff. So youcan see from the fact that we are recording1,000 there that there are significantly morejob classifications and work types that arerecorded in that figure, because it is theprogram staff. There is a notional allocation ofcorporate services staff into each of theprogram areas as a result of the accrualbudgeting as well.

I am very confident that these 70 newstaff will see 70 professional, permanent front-line positions out there in area offices where itmatters. In addition, from time to time there willcontinue to be some contract staff andtemporary staff. In terms of planning, I do notthink that the member would be seriouslysuggesting that if an area office has somesavings in staff budgets because of, forexample, one of the new 70 people did notcome on line until March next year because

they have to transfer to Mount Isa, that thosesavings should not be used, if at all possible,for a short-term contract. I think that is goodstaff management and good planning.

Mr BEANLAND: Perhaps not just in thelast two weeks of the financial year, though,Minister as you seem to indicate when thisoccurs. Minister, can I go to Budget Paper No.5, page 33, and in particular to the matter ofFoodbank? Some $1,115,000 has beenallocated for this item. Could you tell us a littlebit about Foodbank and why this money hasbeen allocated?

Ms BLIGH: Yes, Foodbank is a facilitythat operates in a number of States inAustralia and, in Queensland, it has beenoperating for a number of years. What it doesis act as a central collection and distributionpoint for those large supermarket chains tobring food and other items that they areprepared to donate to charity. Organisationsthat administer emergency relief to individualsand families in need can then go to thatcentral distribution point.

It might be best understood if I said that,before Foodbank, something like St Vincentde Paul, for example, who regularly distributeboth food and funds on an emergency basisto individuals and families, as an organisationwould have gone regularly to Woolworths,Coles and to some of the other largeproviders. They would have had standingarrangements with some of them. Now, theycan just go to Foodbank, because Coles,Woolies and everybody else have broughttheir food in there.

Foodbank started in Queensland in 1995.When it started, it was lucky enough to receivethe support of Coca-Cola, which gave itpremises in New Farm, which was an oldwarehouse, at a peppercorn rent. You wouldbe aware of some of the propertydevelopment happening in that part of townand, not surprisingly, Coca-Cola is interested inselling the property. They are basically sellingthe property.

Mr BEANLAND: They moved some timeago, yes.

Ms BLIGH: Who? Coca-Cola?Mr BEANLAND: Yes.

Ms BLIGH: That is right. When theymoved, they gave the premise to Foodbank,which has been operating in those premisesfor four years at a peppercorn rent. As a resultof Coca Cola now wanting to sell the property,Foodbank will be homeless. It does not havethe capacity to generate funds for a property.


It approached the Government about ourwillingness to support it in its need for anotherwarehousing facility. We have agreed that theproject provides good services to individualsand it proves the efficiency of theorganisations that we fund to provideemergency relief.

The agreement with Foodbank is that wewill provide the funds for either the constructionor the purchase of a suitable facility. TheGovernment will continue to own the facilityand it will be leased back to Foodbank at avery low cost so that it can continue tooperate. We anticipate that that will befinalised within this financial year and that theFoodbank warehouse will be up and runningagain by the end of June 2000.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, is it normalpractice for the department to fund charitableorganisations in this manner? Were otherorganisations like Lifeline, the Salvation Armyor St Vincent de Paul invited to apply for this orsimilar funding?

Ms BLIGH: It is quite normal practice forthe department, from time to time, to makeallocations available to organisations wherethey find themselves in some kind ofemergency circumstances. We are not a largecapital department and you would be aware ofthat. However, we had a capital program, forexample, to build neighbourhood centres. Inthe last two years, five of those have beenconstructed and the last one is in the finalstages of completion. Those facilities will beowned by the department, but they will beoperated by non-Government organisationsthat we fund. There are numbers of examplesof organisations that we provide some supportto and that run very good services come to usbecause something has happened to theirfacility—either the city council has moved it, ithas burnt down or they have had a theft.There are numbers of reasons such as thatwhere they come to us and seek our supportfor help in unusual circumstances. In thosesituations, if we are able to help, we do.

Mr BEANLAND: Did the Government callfor expressions of interest in this matter?

Ms BLIGH: No, it did not. This was not anew program. It was an existing program thatneeded accommodation and we were happyto come to the party. The facility will be ownedby Government and it will be there forGovernment to sell at a later date if it choosesto do so. If for one reason or another thecurrent group that is operating Foodbank wasunable to continue, we would certainly seek a

new auspice to do so and we would publicisetenders at that stage.

Mr BEANLAND: Would you not agree thatLifeline, St Vincent de Paul or the SalvationArmy, as I mentioned before, could do this sortof work? Is there anything special thatFoodbank does that others could not do forcharitable organisations as a whole?

Ms BLIGH: I am sure that there are anumber of people who could do this work. Thefact is that this group has been doing itsuccessfully for five years and has all of theexpertise in place. The Salvation Army or theother organisations that you mentionedadminister emergency relief. Their corebusinesses are working with families, notrunning distribution chains for groceries. Theyare charged with the job of getting on with theircore business.

There are some other examples where wehave made some one-off grants from time totime. The Salvation Army sought theassistance of our Government in making aone-off allocation into a trust fund that it wasdeveloping. It wants to put together a trustfund, the proceeds from which will fund asignificant training agenda for its workersacross the State. I think that is a very goodand a very efficient way for the non-Government sector to provide services. ThePremier agreed that that was the case and mydepartment has provided $150,000 as a one-off grant to the Salvation Army to do that. Thatgrant was matched by other Governments inAustralia.

It is not uncommon for us to make largedonations to charities from time to time.Charities do approach Government. MissionAustralia is another example. The previousGovernment, for example, made $1mavailable to the Guide Dogs for the Blind tobuild a new facility on the north side ofBrisbane. That was a similar situation. TheGuide Dogs for the Blind is an organisationthat has existed for a number of years. It doesa particular job and it was desperately in needfor premises from which to do it. The previousGovernment made a one-off allocation of $1mto build a facility. It was not a situation wheretenders were called to bring in or invent a newguide dogs for the blind organisation. Thatwould be quite foolish, I would suggest.

Mr BEANLAND: Are you aware that yourcolleague in Cabinet Minister Spence was adirector of Foodbank until about 12 monthsago?

Ms BLIGH: Yes, I am. The board ofFoodbank has a number of people from both


sides of politics involved in it. It is actually agood example of what politicians could usefullybe doing in their communities. It is chaired byJim Soorley, the Lord Mayor of Brisbane. Itwas the brainchild of Clem Jones, who I thinkeverybody on both sides of politics wouldagree is very dedicated to working in hiscommunity and has contributed much to it.From its inception, Mike Evans has also beena board member. As I said, it is a goodexample of how politicians ought to becontributing their skills, particularly once theyhave left the political realm. I congratulate notonly my colleague Judy Spence but the othermembers of the board for the work that theydo. I understand that Ms Spence left theboard when she joined the Cabinet and thatwas an appropriate thing for her to do.

Mr BEANLAND: Did you meet with any ofthe Labor identities involved in Foodbank todiscuss the funding provided in the Budget?

Ms BLIGH: I certainly took a delegationfrom Foodbank. Ian Brusasco came to meetwith me about this issue, to tell me about theproblem with Coca Cola. They heard justbefore Christmas last year that Coca Cola wasin the process of selling the building. As itturned out, the process of sale has been muchslower than anticipated, but at the time theycame to me it looked like it might take onlythree weeks or so.

This allocation is not being funded out ofthe budget of the department. It is beingfunded as a special allocation from Treasury. Itis a one-off payment. If we had that sort ofsituation with other organisations, I wouldmake an approach to Treasury in the sameway. That is why it is recorded in the Budgethighlights.

Mr BEANLAND: Did Minister Spence everdiscuss it with you or actually endorse thematter when it was being considered atCabinet? Did the Premier discuss it with you?

Ms BLIGH: No. I can confirm that MinisterSpence never raised the matter with me onany occasion. She noticed it in the Budgethighlight documents and said to me that shethought that it was a good thing. She hasnever had any discussions with me. Myunderstanding is that since she left the board,she has not had anything more to do with theorganisation. I also confirm that it has neverbeen discussed in Cabinet, but obviously it hasbeen discussed by the Cabinet Budget ReviewCommittee.

Mr BEANLAND: I understand also that anumber of other Labor identities are membersof the board, such as a former member of the

House, Molly Robson, the Lord Mayor's Chiefof Staff, Bernie Green, the union officialDawson Petie and I think you mentioned aformer Lord Mayor of the city, Clem Jones. Inrelation to this particular matter, you say thatthe funding is a one-off special allocation fromTreasury. How is that to be paid back toTreasury? Is there a repayment process?

Ms BLIGH: There is no repaymentprocess. The point I was making is that it is notcoming out of the base budget of thedepartment. It is a deliberate allocation.

Mr BEANLAND: What is the rental for thisfacility?

Ms BLIGH: It is yet to be determined, butit will be a nominal rent. We are trying toprovide the organisation with the capacity tooperate in the way that it has been operatingfor some time. I would have thought that theorganisation and the work that it does wouldbe supported by all sides of politics. I havenever done anything to hide the fact that theboard has a number of people from my side ofpolitics on it but, as I have mentioned, MikeEvans is a very prominent member of themember's side of politics. This organisation iswell respected in the field. It feeds the poor. Ithink that that is a very worthy thing and if wecannot support it, we have to ask what it is thatwe are doing.

The CHAIRMAN: Minister, I refer to page6 of the MPS. Given the public's interest inchild protection, could you outline whatinitiatives have been established to addressthe historical neglect of children in need ofState protection?

Ms BLIGH: I alluded to a number of themin my opening statement. They have been theprime focus of our department's work over thelast 12 months. Firstly, of course, the Fordecommission of inquiry was established andcompleted. It was completed in nine months. Itdocumented the historical neglect of childrenwho were in the care of the State. I have saidbefore, and I think it bears repeating, that itprovides us with a very good blueprint. Inaddition to the commission of inquiry, the ChildProtection Act was passed by the Parliamentin March this year. The Act replaces theoutdated Children's Services Act. It makesavailable to the courts a range of flexible andrelevant orders for the protection of childrenand the support of their families.

The Act will not be proclaimed until early2000 to allow for the training of staff and thetransition process for children on orders.However, section 183 of the Act, which dealswith media coverage of children in our care,


has already been proclaimed. It is not goodenough that this legislation has been passed;we have to make sure that we have a systemin place that will support this legislation. To thisend, officers of the department have beeninvolved in a very extensive child protectionreform strategy which has been developedwith regional committees and individuals rightacross Queensland. Additional funds wereallocated last year through reallocationinternally for 30 additional professional andprogram support staff to be appointed in areaoffices across the State, again to improve ourfront-line response.

We also established a Child ProtectionCouncil. This high-level council was establishedin March to improve and increase thecooperation and coordination, and not onlythat, between Government departments.Although my department obviously has theprimary carriage of these issues, the lives ofchildren are not segregated into Governmentdepartment boundaries. The HealthDepartment, the Education Department, thepolice department, the Justice Departmentand the Children's Commissioner have asignificant interest and an important role toplay in improving our child protection response.But, most significantly, the council includesrepresentatives from the community sector,many of whom are the people actually outthere working with these children once theyhave come into our care. It includesrepresentatives of some of our major serviceproviders as well as people from academia.

In the second half of last year, Iannounced a six-month pilot program foryoung people leaving the department's care.Prior to this, it had been a pretty ad hoc matteras to how people left our care. Upon turning18, children are no longer in the guardianshipof the department. Too many of these childrenwere then leaving without a structured leavingplan. This project has been enormouslysuccessful. It has identified some significantservice gaps for young people, and ongoingfunds will be committed to keep this pilot as apermanent feature of the department's work.

The CHAIRMAN: That is veryencouraging. Could you outline the costs inrelation to the Forde inquiry?

Ms BLIGH: Yes, I am very pleased tohave an opportunity to report to theCommittee on this matter. The Fordecommission of inquiry was established inAugust 1998. It originally had a requirement toreport to Government by March 1999. We setit a very short timetable of six months.However, due to some personal circumstances

of Commissioner Forde, the deadline wasextended to May 1999. The commission had abudget of $2.8m. Despite the fact that thecommission required an extension, I ampleased to be able to report that it came in notonly on budget but under budget and its finalcost was $2.5m. The savings that have beenmade by the commission have been used toestablish a counselling service for formerresidents of institutions. That counsellingservice started this week, on 11 October.

The cost to taxpayers of this commissioncompares very favourably with that for othercommissions of inquiry in recent years. You willbe aware that when we put together thiscommission the Premier was very keen tomake sure that it did not become a spendingmachine for lawyers and a spending machineout of control. I think the commission is to becongratulated for its rigour and attention to itsbudget constraints. We can compare it, forexample, with the Connolly/Ryan inquiry, whichno doubt the member for Indooroopilly is alltoo familiar with. This inquiry ran for 10 monthsand it cost the taxpayers $10m. TheConnolly/Ryan inquiry spent $1m a month onwhat I think is widely understood now to benothing more than a political vendetta.Compare that with the spending of the Fordeinquiry, at $260,000 a month. I think the publiccan judge for themselves which of thoseinquiries was a more worthwhile expenditure oftaxpayers' money and I congratulate theinquiry again for staying within its budget sowisely.

Mr FENLON: I note from page 7 of theMPS that there is a $10m increase in the childprotection budget. Given that the Forde inquiryrecommended an injection of at least $100minto the base of your portfolio's budget for childprotection, can you explain how the $10m willmake an impact?

Ms BLIGH: The $10m is the first step. Inaddition to the $10m, the budget identifiesthat that amount will be increasedincrementally in each year until the year 2002,when it will grow to an increase of $40m in ourbase budget. Our child protection budget isaround $90m, so an increase of $40m is analmost 50% increase in our budget over thenext three budgets. The increased fundingrepresents, in my view, a very significant firstand important step forward in addressingsome of the recommendations of the Fordeinquiry. It will go towards addressing the 70front-line staff, about whom I have given somedetail. It will go towards improving the ability ofarea officers to locate placements for childrenwho are unable to live with their families. It will


also be going towards some additionalremuneration and support for foster carers andmake the payment system for foster carersmore user friendly. Additional funds will beallocated for child-related costs to meet thespecial therapeutic, educational and socialneeds of children in our care. This particularpart of the allocation is really aimed at drivingsome improvements in our placement turnoverfor children who can be very difficult to placeby providing more support to those fostercarers who are taking on some of our moredifficult children. It will also go towardsimproving the quality of care once children arein our system through putting in placeimproved monitoring and quality systems.

We will also be, as I said earlier, improvingour transition from care for children who areturning 18 and leaving our care. The moneywill also be spent in the first stages ofaddressing the recommendations for servicesfor young offenders and for the design ofsome of the programs that will be put in placein the new youth justice services. The firstpayment will be made into the new trust fund,which is part of our response to addressing theneeds of past victims.

One of the recommendations of theForde inquiry was also to boost the role of theChildren's Commission's official visitor program,and $100,000 has been allocated for thispurpose. As I said, it is a very significant firststep and it is indicative of our Government'sbona fides and commitment in this area. It ismoney that has been delivered in a very tightbudgetary context and it was one of the mostsignificant recurrent allocations in this Budget.However, the Budget Speech records that thePremier has made his own personalcommitment and he has recorded in theBudget Speech that this is just the beginning.The $40m over four years is the first step, andwe will be revisiting this matter in each Budget.

The national average that was identifiedby the Forde inquiry is something that weshould be aiming for. Our inability to matchnational average spending in this area hasoccurred only because of decades anddecades of neglect. You cannot fix thatovernight and we do not pretend we can fix itin one Budget year. But I think ourcommitment speaks for itself.

Mr FENLON: I refer the Minister to heranswer to a question on notice in relation tothe 70 new child protection workers and also toher comments today in terms of the imminentadvertisement relating to the appointment ofthose officers, and I ask: can the Minister

provide any further detail as to the date onwhich those employees will commence work?

Ms BLIGH: As I said, the advertisementshave been placed in this Saturday's paper.The recruitment process will vary from town totown, obviously. We will be looking for amixture of both new graduates and peoplewith some experience. You will see from theads that we are advertising specifically forpeople to become team leaders as well; we willbe looking for some experienced staff. We willhave to match that mix of people to some ofthe areas of the State. I am very confident thatwe can have these 70 people in place by theend of this financial year. But I accept that wemight have some people on by Christmas andit might take us a bit longer to have peopleactually in the office in some of our moredistant locations where it may not be so easyto recruit that expertise. We might have torecruit that expertise in Brisbane and thentransfer those people to the new places. I thinkI have answered questions in relation to thisquite extensively from the member forIndooroopilly. However, I draw the attention ofthe member for Indooroopilly to the fact thathe some months ago sought informationabout staffing in the department through aquestion on notice in the Parliament. If helooked at that, he would see that there is aconsistent growth in staffing numbers at thefront line. But he would also see that you cantrack from month to month changes andfluctuations in the staffing numbers not only inthis program of the department but also inothers.

The member alluded to the fact that thecontract or temporary staff might have comeon only in the last two weeks of the financialyear. I wish to clarify any misapprehension hemay have had in that regard. The periodrecorded in the MPS is that final two weeks.Many of those staff may well have come on atChristmas or they might have come on forthree-month contracts in March. I very muchwelcome the chance to confirm again to theCommittee that our commitment to 70 newpermanent staff is beyond question and we willbe able to name those officers by the end ofthe financial year. I would fully expect thatsome of the staff who are currently on short-term contracts will apply for those jobs and, insome cases, they will be successful andbecome permanent members of ourdepartment's staff.

Mr FENLON: As the Minister is aware,foster parents play an important role in thecare of children who have been abused andneglected. I refer to the Output Statement on


page 9 of the MPS, and ask: what steps havebeen taken to support foster parents andensure quality of care?

Ms BLIGH: I think we would allacknowledge that, without the hard work anddedication of foster carers, child protection inthis State just simply could not function. Whilethe Forde inquiry highlighted the problems withlarge scale institutional care, I think it is not aswidely understood as it could be. Thealternative to that really is family based careand that requires families and individualpeople to be prepared to put their hands up tobecome foster parents. It means that they notonly have to open their homes and their livesbut their hearts to abused and neglectedchildren, and it is a very difficult job. Theyprovide this service often at considerablefinancial cost to themselves and their families.In recognition of these costs, foster carersreceive an allowance which goes some way tomeeting those costs. This budget will see thatallowance get fully indexed, and thatallowance will keep pace with the cost of living.

Over the past year there have been anumber of other significant initiatives whichhave been put in place to try to recognise thework of foster parents. We have a legislativerequirement in the Child Protection Act for thedirector-general to negotiate a statement ofcommitment with foster carers—somethingalong the lines of the charter of rights forchildren in care. While the Act is yet to beproclaimed, consultations are well under wayfor the drafting of this statement and, in orderto assist the Foster Parents Association ofQueensland to participate in the process, Ihave recently provided a grant of $10,000 tothem for a project worker to work on this andother projects.

There have been instituted a regularseries of meetings between the director-general and senior members of the executiveof the Foster Parents Association ofQueensland to build on that relationship. Arepresentative of the Foster ParentsAssociation has also been included on theChild Protection Council in recognition of therole they play in the system. Foster carershave also been well represented on some ofthe regional planning groups that I mentionedbefore which are underpinning the childprotection reform strategy.

As I said, it is very difficult for people torecognise the work of foster parents, and it isvery difficult, I think, for the Government inmany ways to say thank you for the work thatthey do. This year, as a gesture in thatdirection, I instituted an inaugural foster care

excellence awards system. These awards weremade to 13 carers throughout the State inrecognition of the outstanding achievementsthat they have made to fostering children.Some of the recipients of that award hadfostered as many as 40 or 50 children duringtheir lifetime. So it is a very significant personalcontribution that they make. This is the firsttime we have done these awards. We lookforward to building on them and to workingwith the Foster Parents Association and withregional officers of the department to ensurethat we can continue to recognise that goodwork in the future.

This year's budget, as I said, will also seeus making available extra funds for somefoster carers who are taking on some of ourmost difficult children to assist them to havestable placements and do everything we canto minimise their placement turnover.

Mr FENLON: Can you outline from page26 of the MPS the major initiatives undertakenby the Children's Commission in the last 12months?

Ms BLIGH: Yes, certainly. When theformer Children's Commissioner stood asideamid much controversy, we needed to find ashort-term replacement very quickly and withvery little warning. It was not easy at such shortnotice to find a person who had the necessaryexperience, expertise and management skillsto take over the commission at a time that wasa very difficult period for the commission.

The Cabinet approved therecommendation to appoint Robin Sullivan,who was at the time the Deputy Director-General of Education Queensland. Robin hasproved a very, very successful person to fillthat job. It has been a very difficult time for thecommission. During her time ascommissioner—and she has beensubsequently permanently appointed—MsSullivan has proved to be a highly competentmanager as well as a respected figurehead.She has opened up the workings of thecommission by establishing a communityreference group that helps her to inform thestrategic direction of the commission. As youknow, the legislation for the commission is alsobeing reviewed and she has played a veryconstructive role in putting forward somelegislative changes that are necessary for hercommission to do its work.

The Forde inquiry recommended that therole of the commission be furtherstrengthened, and these recommendationsare being incorporated in the review of thelegislation that is occurring. I seek leave of the


Committee to ask Robin Sullivan if she couldperhaps give some further material aboutsome of the particular initiatives that she hasbeen pursuing. We might need to get a slightextension of time, but I think some of them arequite worth while hearing.

Ms SULLIVAN: As the Minister indicated,I was acting in the position from 24 Novemberlast year and was appointed on 6 April. Duringthat period I have established an interimadvisory council with a number of relevantdepartmental and community representativesand, in particular, some youth advocacyrepresentatives. We have developed with thestaff and with outside input a draft strategicplan for the year 2000.

I have spent a lot of time visiting regionaland rural centres. I have been to northQueensland, central Queensland, the DarlingDowns, Wide Bay and the Sunshine Coast aswell as innumerable listening and speakingengagements in the south-east corner. I havealso developed a comprehensivecommunication and marketing campaign forthe commission, and that will be put in placeboth now and after the new legislation. I havealso developed a draft performance planningand review process for the staff. There hadbeen no process of performance planning andreview for the staff prior to my arrival.

We have linked the Children'sCommission web site as well as enhancing it tosecure and other related sites. I have alsoenhanced the information technology of thecommission so that we certainly can providethe department in particular as well as otherservice providers with timely advice and trendanalysis.

The CHAIRMAN: Feel free to continue fora further two minutes if you so wish.

Ms SULLIVAN: Thank you very much. Ithink the other thing that I am particularlyproud of at the moment is the research forumsthat we have been holding around the State.We have held one in the south-east cornerand we plan to have one with James CookUniversity of north Queensland in Townsvilleearly next year where we bring policy makers,practitioners and the latest research onchildren's issues together. I have been quiteamazed when people tell me that these threegroups have not met together before to workin the best interests of the children of thisState. The children of this State are nearly onemillion of our citizens. I think it behoves all ofus to work on behalf of the best interests ofthose children.

Mr BEANLAND: I refer to disabilities, onpage 1 of the MPS. I also refer to your answerto question on notice No. 9 in which youindicated that the new department will beestablished on a neutral cost basis, and I ask:can the Minister indicate how the newdepartment designated Disability ServicesQueensland is to be created without using aneven greater proportion of available fundsbeing spent on, in the Premier's terms,bureaucracy rather than on people withdisability when, for example, the executivedirector position is being advertised andupgraded from SES2 to SES3 together withother reclassifications of positions in addition tosuch matters as signage, paint and otherestablishment costs?

Ms BLIGH: I think the establishment ofthis new agency is one of the—as I saidearlier, it is the implementation of one of ourelection commitments and it is an excitingopportunity for us to give more focus andattention to this question right acrossGovernment, and the formation of this agencywill help to lead and drive some of thosereforms. I can assure the member forIndooroopilly that the riding instructions I havefrom Treasury are that it will be cost neutral,and it will be cost neutral. Obviously thisinvolves a restructuring of the totaldepartment, and some of the SES positionsthat will go into the new department will be justtransferred from the SES complement that iscurrently in the Department of Families, Youthand Community Care. I think it is importantthat we get a very senior person to lead what Ithink are going to be some very challengingreforms over the next five-year period, and thatis the time frame we are using to develop thefive-year strategic plan.

In terms of some of the issues aboutlocation of officers and signage, it is not thecase that in December this year when welaunch the agency that there will be 20 newoffices in place. We will have a new logo, wewill have new corporate signage, etc., but insome offices in some towns it will still be theDepartment of Families, Youth andCommunity Care and offices will be co-locatedand there will be clear signage there that thatis where the new disability agency can beaccessed. We are still in the process, though,of finalising these sorts of details and it is a bitdifficult to give accurate answers, although Iam sure that you will continue to ask questionsas we get closer to the finalisation over thenext couple of months. I might ask thedirector-general if he has anything to add inrelation to the DSQ restructuring.


Mr SMITH: With respect to the work onDisability Services Queensland, the Ministerhas recently approved the regional boundariesfor the new agency and also the structure thatwill operate under the separate entity fromFamilies, Youth and Community Care.

One of the specific instructions that theMinister has mentioned is that the operationsin terms of both Families, Youth andCommunity Care and Disability ServicesQueensland are within the budget parametersthat we currently operate within. So we are notlooking at increasing either our overalloperating salaries or operating budget as, ifyou like, a proportion of our total operations. Infact, in the last year there has been areduction in the proportion of salary andoperating costs to total directions of disabilityservices funding. I think it is important tocontinue that, as a great bulk of funding underDisability Services is directed through the non-Government sector and church and charitablegroups.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, surely you wouldagree that if you are going to incur costs,whatever they are for—to establish signageand these types of things or, as I understand,from the upgrading of an SES position—that initself means additional costs. Those costshave to come off somewhere. You are goingto either reduce staff numbers to make up thedifference—I am not saying for a moment thatyou are—or take some other course of action,because the alternative is to reduce the fundsavailable to go to those people in need ofdisability services. It is arithmetically impossibleto do it the way you are suggesting.

Ms BLIGH: I can understand yourconcerns. I am equally concerned to makesure that the funds we have available fordisability services in Queensland go as far aspossible to individuals who need support,rather than into administering the funds thatgo to those individuals. To that end, as thedirector-general outlined, I have recentlyapproved that there will be eight regions forthe new Disability Services Queensland. Someof the work of those regions will need to beresourced by actually moving some of theresources out of head office and into regions.So rather than actually adding costs, what weare looking at doing is actually movingresources into frontline work. It changes thewhole structure, because it is no longer part ofthe Department of Families, Youth andCommunity Care.

I can confirm that there are no additionalSES positions. Obviously there will be somesignage costs. One of the reasons for this is

that when somebody finds that, for example,they have a child with a disability, theirhusband suddenly has an acquired brain injurythrough a car accident or their mother acquiressome sort of injury and they have never hadany contact with the Department of Families,Youth and Community Care, it would not beclear to them that that is the gateway intoGovernment services. What we want is a clearpoint of entry into Government.

It is important that people in Mackay orMount Isa or Townsville can actually see a signthat says "Disability Services". So, yes, therewill be costs for signage. It is true to say thatthe non-recurrent savings that are used to payfor that signage might have been used forsome other purpose, but they will be part ofthe existing budget. Some of those would benormal costs associated with corporateletterhead, etc. and some of those will comefrom non-recurrent savings. But they will comefrom existing internal resources and they willbe kept to a minimum.

Mr BEANLAND: You are upgrading anSES position. There is an upgrade from level 2to level 3.

Ms BLIGH: That is right, but total staffingcosts will remain the same.

Mr BEANLAND: If total staffing costs willremain the same, then someone else will bedowngraded accordingly to make up thedifference. Again, it is just arithmeticallyimpossible for it to be any other way. Therehas to be some give and take somewhere,with respect, Minister. You cannot do itotherwise. I have said before that arithmetic isnot your strong suit.

Ms BLIGH: You are the one who cannotcount to 70.

Mr BEANLAND: I can count to 70 verywell. We will come back to that later. We willjust stick to this for a moment, though. Thefacts are that you upgrading an SES positionalone from 2 to 3. There are probably otherreclassifications to take place. So there will bea number of changes. You are going to eightregions. There are some savings in someareas, but there are also increased costs in anumber of areas. If there are savings, youhave not indicated exactly where they aregoing to be. I have indicated where there aregoing to be increased costs, but you have notindicated how you are going to pay for them.

Ms BLIGH: Part of the reason for thisdifficulty is that we are still in the process ofdetermining the shape and the structure of theagency. The disability services program has asignificant budget and it will have the same


sort of staffing fluctuations in contract andtemporary staffing as I outlined earlier inrelation to the child protection and familysupport work of the department.

The operational and salaries budget ofthe department will be kept to their currentamounts. That means that we will have to findefficiencies. It means that we will have to dothe work that we do differently. It will mean thatsome of the resources out of head office willhave to be reallocated into regions. The costsof signage are as yet unknown, so it is notreasonable to expect me to be able to identifya funding source for that. It may be that someof the signage costs cannot be met in thisfinancial year and will go into the next financialyear.

It has been widely discussed with thesector, my ministerial reference group andother people that this is an incrementalprocess. I am determined to ensure that, whilewe set this agency up and we put it on theroad and we put our foot down and get thereforms happening, it will be done on a costneutral basis, and that might mean that wehave to take the pace of reform a little slowerin terms of things such as signage, but we willwait for it.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, you have beenworking on this since before the last election.Now you are expecting me to believe, on theeve of this happening, that you have not donethe basic work and do not know exactly how itis going to work out at the end of the day. Youhave indicated that you have some regions,but surely you must have done all of this otherwork or one would have to ask what you havebeen doing in relation to the planning—or thelack of planning, from what you are saying tome—in the move to this particular new agency.It was in the policy speech. I am not arguing allof that. The point is that this has been on thego for 18 months to two years. Now you comehere today and expect me to believe that youdo not have all of this planned out. I find that alittle steep.

Ms BLIGH: I guess it probably speaks ofthe different way that we go about things. I donot use a Jeff Kennett style of Government: Ido not make pronouncements on high and Ido not make decisions without considerableconsultation with the people who will beaffected. The decision about this agency waswidely consulted about with the disabilityservices sector over the last 12 months. Wehave held a number of consultations. I havehad a ministerial reference group working withme. That reported to me prior to the Cabinetdecision. Cabinet made the decision a couple

of months ago now, but it was not until theCabinet decision was made that we could thenstart sitting down and getting on with thebusiness of determining, for example, howmany regions we would have. This has had tobe done in conjunction with some of therealignments with the Department of Families,Youth and Community Care.

I think it was time well spent. We couldhave moved as an administrative order ofGovernment when we came in last year andthen spent 12 months trying to figure out whatwe were going to do. I took the view that thiswas something that had to be done inpartnership with the non-Governmentsector—as the director-general mentioned, themost significant provider of services in this areais the non-Government sector—andsometimes that takes time. If you want to talkto the Uniting Church representatives in MountIsa for example, sometimes it cannot bearranged overnight. Then you actually have tocollate all of the work.

I make no apology for taking this slowlyand getting it right. It is important for us thatwe get this new agency up and running butthat we do it correctly. I think it has been worthwhile spending the time to do that. Peopleunderstand where we are going. People havehad an opportunity to influence what we do.There were a number of questions that had tobe resolved and they have been.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, it is to happenon 1 December, as I understand. You certainlywill not be accused of being a Jeff Kennettover this particular issue.

I refer to page 14 of the MPS, whichoutlines that you are planning to allocate atotal of some 486 adult lifestyle supportpackages during the current financial year. Ialso understand that there are some 3,613registrants for those adult lifestyle supportpackages. I understand that some 1,500 wereregarded as being in critical need of suchpackages and that these people requireimmediate assistance. What will you be doingabout this group of more than 1,000 peoplewhose needs are critical?

Ms BLIGH: The fact that you have thosefigures is a testament to the work that thedepartment has done over the last 12 monthsto put in place a system which, for the firsttime, will actually clarify what the extent of theneed is. Up until the last 12 months, we haveonly had anecdotal evidence. And it is one ofthose situations where I fully assumed that Iwould come into Government and, when wehad the $30m allocated through Treasury, we


would have a clearly established and prioritisedwaiting list. Unfortunately, this was not thecase. And in the absence of any resources forso long, I cannot blame either the sector or thedepartment for not having put resources intocollating such a thing. This is the first time thatwe actually have this information. And you areright; it is a very significant figure, and it causesme a great deal of concern that there are somany people who have no assistance at all inrelation to disability services.

In terms of what I will be doing—we will bedoing what we have been doing for the last 12months. We will be allocating the funds thatwe have available to us on a prioritybasis—allocated in a fair and accountablemanner. But what I will mostly be doing isspending my time arguing with your colleagueJocelyn Newman who, frankly, on behalf of theCommonwealth, should be hanging her headin shame.

This issue of unmet need—a backlog ofunmet need—affects every State. Queenslandprobably has one of the worst problems, but itaffects every State. And I can tell you thatboth the conservative and Labor States areunited in the view that the Commonwealth hasplayed too small a role in this. Despitepromises, the Federal Minister has come tothe table almost at the end of the year withwhat can only be described as a paltry offerwhich has restrictions around it that are sotight. Most of the people on the waiting list inthe critical category would not actually get anyof the funds that she is offering, because inmy view what she is simply doing is seeking toreallocate aged care dollars and call it disabilityservices. So much of the work for me in thenext two months will be working hard to putpressure on your colleague Jocelyn Newman,and I would be very happy to have you assistme in that regard in any way that you can.

Mr BEANLAND: But what are you goingto do about these other 1,000 people who arein critical need, Minister?

Ms BLIGH: As I said, we will be allocatingresources that we have on a basis that is fairand reasonable. There are some peoplewhose circumstances during that period willchange from critical to emergencies. We havefunds available to deal with emergencysituations, and we allocate them on a non-recurrent basis on a very regular basis. I amnot sure whether there are any circumstancessuch as this in your own electorate, but I wouldbe surprised if other members of theCommittee did not have circumstances in theirareas where there are people whosecircumstances, while they are judged as

critical, change from being critical toemergencies. And when that happens, we areable to support them. I have to say that the486 that we will be providing services to overthe next 12 months is 486 more than wouldhave been provided under your Government.

Part of the reason we have an evenworse backlog is because there was no moneyput in for the three years you had anopportunity to. So not only do we have thehistorical backlog from the last half a century,we have the last three years when somethingcould have been done to put these thingsright. And as I recall, you had an electioncommitment to put in $34m each year forthree years, and not one cent of it was actuallypaid. We are doing what we can, and I think itis the most significant allocation that has everbeen put in, but I have acknowledgedeverywhere I have a chance to that we have along way to go.

Mr BEANLAND: We did not have threeyears, Minister. We only had two years andfour months.

Ms BLIGH: You had three Budgets, andnot one Budget allocated the $34m.

Mr BEANLAND: Two Budgets, Minister.

Ms BLIGH: Three Budgets. You hadthree Budgets.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, you had the firstBudget, and you did not do it.

Ms BLIGH: And your three Budget papersdid not do it.

Mr BEANLAND: You did not do it in thatBudget, Minister. That is what the story is.

Ms BLIGH: I put the $30m in.The CHAIRMAN: Order!

Mr BEANLAND: That is what the story is,Mr Chairman. The Minister did not do it. If Ican move on to the MPS, page 15, note 5, Iask: what funding will the Government provideto Disability Services Queensland to ensurethat it receives the Commonwealth's offer of, Ithink, $9m for the 2000-01 financial year and$18m for the 2001-02 financial year under theCommonwealth/State Disability Agreement? Inwhat terms will the Minister be responding tothe Commonwealth's offer?

Ms BLIGH: I have already put in apreliminary response to the CommonwealthMinister basically seeking more information.The current Commonwealth Government hasa very strange approach toCommonwealth/State agreements. It hasalways been my understanding that thereason Commonwealth Governments entered


into Commonwealth/State agreements wasthat they used them as a bit of a carrot andstick to drive State Governments to have auniform approach to a social problem acrossAustralia. For some reason, the currentFederal Government does not seemenamoured of that approach and is very loose,in terms of its parameters, around these offers.

The Commonwealth has made an offer of$9m. They have not sought any matchingfunds. In specific terms, what they have said isthat they would be seeking a significantcontribution from State Governments. We donot know what a significant contribution is andwhat it would require, so I have sought moreinformation from the Federal Minister in thatregard. I have also made it clear to the FederalMinister—I went to Canberra in April this yearwith all the other State Ministers, and we wereall there with the understanding that theFederal Minister was coming to the table withan offer that we would then be able tonegotiate. The Federal Minister came withnothing and did not make an offer untilSeptember—past the Budget process for thisGovernment for this year. I have made it clearto the Federal Minister that any contributionthat we can provide to match her offer issomething that will have to be negotiatedthrough our State Budget process. TheBudget is scheduled for May next year, so theBudget process will be beginning soon. Theyare discussions that I will be having withTreasury. I have alerted both the Treasurerand the Premier to the Commonwealth offerbut, frankly, it is very difficult for us to work onthe Commonwealth offer until theCommonwealth can be a little more specific.

Ms NELSON-CARR: Minister, I refer topage 29 of your MPS and ask: given thesignificant capital carryover in the portfolio inrelation to youth justice, could you explain thereasons for this underexpenditure?

Ms BLIGH: The member would be awarethat the Forde commission of inquiry's reportemphasised the need for urgent upgradingand replacement of our youth detentionfacilities. This whole issue has a very long anddisturbing history in Queensland. It is a historyof unspent capital allocations, I am afraid tosay.

In 1995, the Goss Government set aside$24.1m to build a new youth detention centreto replace the severely outdated Sir LeslieWilson Youth Detention Centre. A site waschosen by the then Goss Government. Beforeconstruction could begin, however, there was achange of Government, and this was achange that was to prove disastrous for the

upgrading of the system. Corrective Serviceswas charged with the responsibility under thecoalition. Unfortunately, the site that had beenearmarked for a new youth detention centrewas, instead, used for a new women's prison.Despite a Budget allocation of $28m in 1996-97 and $30m in 1997-98, construction nevercommenced under the coalition Government.A site was approved by the coalitionGovernment by Cabinet in December 1997,but it was never announced. It was a siteapproved at Parkinson—a suburbanneighbourhood—for construction of a new185-bed centre. The site was a very unsuitablesite. It had previously been rejected by thelocal community in 1987 for the construction ofa prison—an adult prison—which was laterconstructed at Borallon. It was patentlyunsuitable, and it is not surprising to me thatthe former Government kept it a secret andcertainly did not take it to the election.

The former Minister for CorrectiveServices, Mr Cooper, was quite clear about theneed for an upgrade. He stated in August1996 that a new youth detention centre wouldbe built. To quote from the former Minister'sstatements to the Sunday Mail in August1996, he said—

"The other two centres, Leslie Wilsonand John Oxley, are in bad shape,especially Sir Leslie Wilson, and we will bemoving as rapidly as we can"—

"rapidly", remember. What is more, in a letterto Windsor residents in November 1996, hestated that the Wilson centre would no longerbe operational when the new centre wascommissioned, "which will occur in two years."Well, despite what seemed like urgency onbehalf of Mr Cooper, the former Governmentwas unable to progress the initiative. In fact,between July 1996 and June 1998 theQueensland Corrective Services Commission,under the coalition Government, spent only$4,138 on new youth detention capital worksdespite having a budget of $30m.

This inactivity by the Corrective ServicesMinisters in the previous Governmenthighlights the Opposition's hypocrisy orselective memory over this issue. For example,I understand that Mr Beanland, in his Budgetreply speech, stated—

"No doubt if the responsibility forthese centres had been left with the thenQueensland Corrective ServicesCommission, the money would have beenspent and the facilities would now beavailable for young people in custody."


I do not think so. After a two and a half yearopportunity, only $4,000 was spent. If that wastheir track record, I do not trust them.

In stark contrast, we are well on track tohaving this on time. In fact, we have spent, todate, $3.3m. That means that, in the 15months we have been in Government, wehave spent more than 800 times as much asthe coalition did on new capital works for thesecentres during their whole term in office. I thinkour record speaks well.

Ms NELSON-CARR: Minister, given thatthe Forde inquiry reported on instances ofabuse and neglect of young people indetention, can you outline how the YouthDetention Centre Infrastructure Plan, as listedon page 29 of your MPS, will limit thisoccurring in the future?

Ms BLIGH: The Forde recommendationswent, in large part, to the need for not onlynew youth detention centres but for us to reallythink about how we put them in place and thesort of design and construction of them. Weare moving to include those recommendationsin our design program. As a start, we aremoving to close the Leslie Wilson centre bythe construction of a new centre at Wacol.

We have made good progress in the totalrebuilding of the Cleveland and John Oxleycentres. In terms of the new centre, closeattention has been given to the design of thereception and the visit areas within the centreto allow for proper and appropriate family andvisitor space to facilitate a better relationshipbetween community member families andpeople residing in the centres asrecommended by the inquiry. The new centrewill have a significantly improved environmentwhen compared with traditional youthdetention centres. It will be designed on acentre within a centre basis to prevent therebeing a large scale institutional feel. It will allowyoung people to be accommodated in smallgroups within residential units which aredistinctively designed to meet their differentneeds and characteristics as well as securitylevels, etc.

There has been consultation withreference groups and key stakeholders toensure that the centre is appropriatelydesigned. Provision has also been made forvideo conferencing facilities. This partlyreduces the need for youth detainees to travelto court. It is therefore a significant securityimprovement. It will also allow contact withfamilies, particularly those from remote areas.This is particularly important for indigenousyoung people. The facilities will also maximise

the opportunity for community involvement foryoung people detained in the facilities with afull range of educational and vocationalprogram areas being built into the design. Thisgoes significantly towards meetingrecommendation 12 of the inquiry.

Ms NELSON-CARR: With reference to thefar-north Queensland Youth at Risk project,can you explain to the Committee how thisprogram will deliver services which werepreviously available at the Petford Aboriginaltraining establishment?

Ms BLIGH: Thank you very much for thequestion. I think it is important to understandthat, other than some horsemanship and ruralactivities, there were no services or programsbeing provided at Petford. For example, therewere no literacy or numeracy courses. Therewas very little. This has been replaced with theFar North Queensland Youth DevelopmentProject. This project is composed of two parts.There is a resource unit which is to be staffedby full-time officers. One has alreadycommenced and the other is due tocommence in November. The project islocated in Cairns.

This unit will have at its discretion anamount of funds which enable it to implementlocal responses in indigenous communities.This is an innovative, flexible and community-based model which I think offers us a realopportunity to make a difference to youngpeople in these communities. It has beendeveloped in full consultation with thosecommunities through the AboriginalCoordinating Council. It is a project that isconsistent with the recommendations of theRoyal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths inCustody, the stolen generation report and therecommendations of the Forde inquiry.

The total recurrent funding of the programis almost $500,000, with a recurrent annualbudget of $482,000. Petford previouslyreceived $226,000 recurrently. I have injectedmore than twice the amount of fundingpreviously available to address the issues ofyoung people at risk in this area. It has beenbarely nine weeks since the first project officercommenced work. I am informed that thisperson has already visited a number ofcommunities and is working with 15 youngpeople who are already participating in theproject. That is a rate of almost two a week ina very short time since the project began.

How does that compare with Petford'strack record? In the last two years of itsoperation, only 30 young people were referredto this facility. That does not represent even


one young person a week. My departmentceased referring young people to Petford inFebruary 1998 under the previous coalitionGovernment because of concerns about itsservice delivery. I am very confident that theprogram we are putting in place has beendeveloped very carefully with communitiesand, whilst it is a very new and innovativemodel, I believe that it will provide significantlyimproved services to young people at risk ofself-harm or of coming into the juvenile justicesystem.

The CHAIRMAN: Minister, I refer to pages11 and 13 of your MPS with regard to the localarea coordination pilots being established byyour department. Can you outline some of theadvantages of this model and the outcomesyou expect for people with disabilities in ruraland regional areas?

Ms BLIGH: Yes. This program is modelledon a very similar program which has beenoperating for almost 10 years in WesternAustralia. While I was in Opposition I visitedthe Western Australian Government andspoke to members of that Government'sDisability Services Commission, who outlined indetail the operation of local area coordination.

Western Australia and Queensland havesome very similar service delivery challenges.We both have to provide services in extensiverural and remote areas. In many of theseplaces there is little or no serviceinfrastructure—particularly in areas of specialisttherapy, etc. The advantage of local areacoordination is that it is an incredibly flexiblemodel. It is very consumer-focused andconsumer-participatory. It is specificallydesigned to support people in rural andregional areas where specialist disabilityservices may not only not exist, but never beviable. It promotes independence and self-sufficiency and is based on participation incommunity life.

The 1996 Western Australian evaluationof the program found that local areacoordination had improved the provision andcoordination of care and support to peoplewith disabilities and their families. Coordinatorsin the local area coordination pilots which wehave up and running will work with people whohave disabilities, and their families, in adefined geographic area. They will work tocoordinate the support services that peopleneed, either by accessing mainstream serviceswhich may not have previously provided aservice to people with disabilities, or findingaccess to specialist services if they exist or canbe brought in on a temporary basis.

They will work with communities so thatthe mainstream services include families andmake up for the absence of specialist services.They will provide information and advocacysupport for families and individuals.Coordinators will not be providing servicesdirectly, but they will have access to adiscretionary fund of $10,000 per annumwhich they can allocate to families andindividuals in a very flexible way. For example,they might be able to use funds for someoneon a property out of town to employ aneighbour to provide emergency care. Theymay be able to provide some natural respiteby funding a child's grandmother from anotherpart of Queensland, or even interstate, whenthe mother of a child with a disability has to behospitalised for a period of time.

It is that sort of flexibility and whatever-it-takes attitude, and being pretty flexible about itrather than going through rigid programguidelines, which I think will make a realdifference on the ground. There are six initialpilots at Mount Isa, Cooktown, Hervey Bay,Gympie, Murgon and Mundubbera. We havedeliberately chosen some very remote areasas well as a couple of connected regionalareas to see how the system works in thoseareas. They will be evaluated after 18 months.If they provide the sort of services that wehope they will provide, we would be veryconfident that we can extend them and makethe disability services dollar go as far as it can.

The CHAIRMAN: Given the huge amountof unmet needs, why have you been unable tospend the full allocation from last year'sbudget?

Ms BLIGH: First of all, I can confirm to theCommittee that last year's budget allocationhas now been spent. As I alluded to earlier,the system that I inherited was one for whichwe had no data at all on the extent of unmetneeds. There were no waiting lists. There wasno system for allocating funds either fairly ortransparently. There was very littleaccountability. We had a system where peoplehad to fit wherever the services were availableand this was caused largely, as I said,because of chronic underresourcing in thepast.

Over the last 12 months a revolution hasbegun in disability services. We havedeveloped a service which now fundsindividuals rather than services. The individualis the person who has the funds allocated andapproved for him. He then goes and buys theservices for himself in his local area.


We have developed a system whichaccepts responsibility for supporting familiesand children with a disability rather thanabandoning them to their own resources andoften having to pick them up in the childprotection system when they cannot cope anylonger. We have developed a system whichallocates funding according to the criticality ofneed, not according to which electorate aperson lives in or where they have strongadvocates or where they can work the media.

A revolution like this does not just happenovernight. As I said earlier, it takes time toconsult with the sector and to make sure thatwe get it right. We have held a total of 148focus groups and workshops over the past 12months to consult with the sector on the newdirections. It takes time to build up theinfrastructure, both Government and non-Government, and to employ and to train staffto take up these new services.

We have had to establish priority panels.We have had to develop application forms.We have had to determine criteria for how toestablish criticality of need. $15m of our $30melection commitment was available forexpenditure from 1 January in the 1998-99financial year. The audited carryover was$4.1m. I am advised that $3.3m of thiscarryover was committed at the time of thecarryover.

It is important to understand that theprocess of allocating this lifestyle supportpackage is one where individuals have theopportunity to negotiate with service providersabout what it is that they want. This is the firsttime that this has happened. It takes people awhile to get used to it. It may be that in sometowns people have been provided with moneyand there is no service in the town. Either onehas to be invented or a very small servicemight have to put on two new staff. It is not aneasy thing to find two suitable staff who wantto work with people with disabilities. They mightneed training, etc. So, whilst the funds werecommitted, the actual money had not beenexpended because in many cases theindividuals were still negotiating with serviceproviders.

So that lag time is not a bad thing. Thatlag time is actually a good thing: it builds intothe system some power for the consumer, butit does take a little time. If we take out thecommitted funds, the remaining carryover wasonly $0.8m or just 5% of the total fundingavailable. I think that, in the context of thefunding revolution, that is a pretty good record.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister.

Mr FENLON: Minister, I refer to pages 11and 29 of your MPS and ask: what is thecurrent status of establishing an alternativeresidential facility for the former residents ofChallinor?

Mr BLIGH: Thank you very much. Thiswas one of the first challenges that I had whenI took over the portfolio and we have madesome very significant and important progresson it. When I took over this portfolio, Challinorhad been sold to the University of Queenslandand there was, I think, little more than aboutfive or six weeks until the expected date oftakeover. While we managed to negotiate a bitof an extension, it still left us with a situationwhere 54 residents of the former institutionfaced homelessness. There were no short-term or long-term solutions in place for any ofthem; there was no site finalised or located foreither of the two centres that had beenpromised.

Since then, interim accommodation hasbeen found for all of these 54 people, either incommunity housing or at the Basil StaffordCentre on a temporary basis. Some peoplehave chosen to remain in their interimaccommodation. There are four people whohave chosen to live permanently in theaccommodation that was found for them at afacility called McPherson Lodge and twopeople have decided to stay on at BasilStafford.

The centre at Loganlea is almostcompleted. Tenders closed for the centre on 4December last year. There was a sod turningon 12 March and, on all reasonablepredictions, we expected that it would beoperational by the middle of the year aroundJuly. Unfortunately, due to one of the wettestBrisbane winters on record—and I think thatmany, many building projects failed to predictthat—people will now be moving into theirhouses by the end of this month. There will be23 people in seven separate houses.

It took us some time to locate a secondsite but there is a site now identified atBracken Ridge. It is on schedule to go out totender in December. Twelve people will belocated in four separate houses on this site.The design has been finalised with theassistance of a family reference group. Theinvolvement of families and the individualsthemselves in this whole process has been akey feature of the work that has been done todate. I am pleased to say that both of thesecentres are going to be located in communitiesthat have been well consulted about thelocation of this facility and the people who willbe moving there. Both of these centres will be


in neighbourhoods where they will bewelcomed, where communities are supportiveand where they are close to shops, servicesand transport.

I think that this has been a verycontroversial and difficult issue, but I am verypleased with the way in which the program hasprogressed. Some of the officers have beenout on a regular basis tramping the streetsdoorknocking houses, talking to people aboutthe people moving from Challinor. I spokeabout this at the Estimates committee lastyear. I think that it has been a very openprocess. We have been very pleased with thekind of community support that we found inboth Loganlea and Bracken Ridge. Icommend not only the officers of mydepartments but also the communitiesinvolved for the open arms that they haveextended to 54 people who would haveotherwise been homeless.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. Icall the member for Indooroopilly.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, I refer to notenine on page 15 of the MPS and ask: what isthe breakdown of the figures for Project 300,the enhancement to disability servicesproposal, the increase in unmet needs fundingand the unspent grants carried over?

Ms BLIGH: I am unable to give you thatdetail at the moment, but I am happy to takethe question on notice and we can provide it toyou after the break.

Mr BEANLAND: Thank you, Minister. Irefer to the same note on the same page ofthe MPS in relation to taking from the HealthDepartment the responsibility for 300 peoplefrom psychiatric hospitals with a transfer of only$12.4m from Health. Allowing for the 5%administration cost, which is your benchmarkfigure, this amounts to less than $40,000 perperson for packages that are likely to cost agreat deal more than that on average.Minister, I was wondering what additionalfunding have you received to provide theseparticular services?

Ms BLIGH: I thank the member for thequestion. This project also has had achequered history. It was an initiative of theformer Labor Government and it was aninitiative that strove to provide opportunities forpeople with a psychiatric disability and whowere inappropriately residing in psychiatricwards of hospitals to move into the communitywhere they would be able to live with somecommunity support outside of thoseinstitutions.

The project aimed to give 300 people thatopportunity. I am actually not sure of thebackground. Given that the primary focus ofthis project was to move people out of amedical, hospitalised setting and into acommunity setting where they would havecommunity support, the project was originallylocated in the Department of Families, Youthand Community Care where the disabilityprogram has extensive experience andexpertise in the process of community support.Unfortunately, for reasons best known tohimself, the former Minister, Mr Lingard, eitherthrough a lack of interest or just unwillingness,had the project transferred to the HealthDepartment, which was under the auspicesthen of the then Minister, Mr Horan.

The project took some time betweenbeing transferred there and transferred back.When we discussed this before the election,the Minister for Health shared my view that thecommunity support focus of this project shouldbe retained and it should be moved back. Ithas been moved back. The average cost I willget to you after the break. Not all of the peoplein this project require full-time accommodationsupport. Some of them require assistance—some regular contact to help them with thingslike shopping, financial management andmedication—but they do not necessarily need24-hour care. That is one of the reasons whythey are being relocated out of hospitalsettings. So I can certainly give you theaverage cost per client in the project to dateafter the break, but you will find that there is,as there is in the disability program, peoplewho, with a very, very small amount ofassistance, can live very, very satisfactorily inthe community whereas other people require24-hour, very expensive assistance and thereis everything in between. So you will find thatgamut in this program as well. I would be veryhappy to come back to you after the breakwith some accurate costings on that.

Mr BEANLAND: Thank you. Minister, Irefer to the output statement on page 14 ofthe MPS in relation to services for people withdisabilities. Why did you fail so miserably tomeet your target of 174 families for supportunder the new Family Support Initiative withonly 13 families actually receiving the benefit?How can the community believe that you willnow meet this year's target of 262 when morethan 160 families missed out last year?

Ms BLIGH: Just give me a moment tolocate the line in the MPS.

Mr BEANLAND: You have the big book; Ihave only a little book. You have the details,Minister.


Ms BLIGH: Yes. I think that it is importantto recognise that, in terms of the disabilityprogram, so many things are happening atonce in a six-month period. As I have said, wewere revolutionising the funding process. Wehave actually had to not only start it fromscratch; we had to put it into place andimplement it. We had to put in place significantprocesses to get the disability agency up andrunning and many, many other challenges. Ithink that it is fair to say that we set the barpretty high and we did not meet all of thegoals that we set ourselves. But we do notresile from the fact that it is important to settargets and to set goals.

The flexible family support issue is onethat we are well on track now to meeting.There were certainly delays in itsimplementation, but the delays wereassociated with developing the right models,as well as—once the models weredeveloped—actually identifying the number ofchildren and families who might be able toaccess it. It was also a result of recruitmentprocesses for suitably qualified staff andappropriate training for facilitators.

As I have said earlier, this whole area ofwork is a new area of work for the disabilityprogram, and it did require the recruitment ofsome staff with expertise in working withfamilies. I regret that we were not able to movethe program along a little bit faster than wewere, but we are well on track to meeting thetarget of 262, and many of those have nowbeen funded. It is all part of doing a lot ofthings at once.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. Thehearing is now suspended for a short breakand we will resume at 6 p.m.

Sitting suspended from 5.44 p.m. to6.04 p.m.

The CHAIRMAN: The hearings ofEstimates Committee G is now resumed.Minister, I invite you to supply answers toquestions taken on notice?

Ms BLIGH: I would like the opportunity toaddress the questions from the member forIndooroopilly that I took before the break.Firstly, I refer to the question from the memberfor Indooroopilly regarding note 9 on page 15of the MPS. The reasons for the increase ingrants and subsidies between 1998-99 and1999-2000 of $41.339m is primarily a result ofa combination of the following factors: firstly,the full-year effect of the Unmet Need initiative,an enhancement of disability services for theMoving Ahead program, the transfer of Project300, the net impact of the carryover from the

last financial year, funds available through theCSDA for this year and the balance is somesmall grants and escalation.

In relation to the question from themember for Indooroopilly in relation to thetransfer of Project 300, part of the difficulty isthat while the project was originally designed tomove people with psychiatric disabilities out ofpsychiatric facilities, as the project progressedit was also found that a number of people withintellectual disabilities were inappropriatelylocated in those psychiatric facilities. Theproject has slightly widened its net to includethe kinds of people who would be targetedthrough the project's resources. By targetingpeople with an intellectual disability, some ofthe per capita costs have risen.

I presume that the target of the member'squestion is whether or not this is still Project300 or some other number. I confirm thatthere is ample funding this year to movepeople progressively from psychiatric facilities.We are quite confident that the funds will bethere for the following year. Whether or not the300 target can be achieved has to bereviewed as we go through the process ofrelocating people and determining the basis oftheir needs. If we are unable to meet the 300target, that will have to be reviewed in thecontext of subsequent Budgets.

On current rates, the average cost perpackage is about $55,000. On that basis, it isunlikely that the 300 target would be met, butit is also possible that a number of peoplewould be moved whose costs were less thanthat average. It is a question that we will haveto review as we continue.

Mr BEANLAND: I can say to the Ministerthat with $55,000, you will not get 300.

Ms BLIGH: No.

Mr BEANLAND: You are well shy of themark by anybody's calculations.

Ms BLIGH: That is right. That is thecurrent average of the people who havemoved so far.

Mr BEANLAND: You will be well shy of themark, because under $40,000 is the averagewhen you calculate it out, taking into accountyour administration charges.

Ms BLIGH: That is right.Mr BEANLAND: Going back to your

previous answer, could I have the figures thatgo with those items, which is really what Iasked for?

Ms BLIGH: Certainly. The full-year effectof the Unmet Need initiative is approximately


$14m, the enhancement of the Moving Aheadprogram is $2.048m, I think, but $2m for thispurpose, Project 300 was $12.4m, thecarryover was $6.2m and the CSDA fundswere $5.4m. I do not have the figure for thebalance, but it is small grants and escalationcosts.

Mr BEANLAND: I return to the question Iasked prior to the adjournment in relation tothe target number of families to receivesupport in 1999-2000, which is 262. Do wehave a guarantee that you will get to thatfigure of 262 or is that just a figure that you aregoing to target, like the figure of 174 was lastyear when we only got to 13? You haveindicated that you want to get there, but doyou give any guarantee to the Committee thatyou will get there or is it just a figure that wehope to get to?

Ms BLIGH: No. The figure has beendetermined on the basis of the budgetallocation that has been made for familysupport services. Like every other figure in theMPS, it is an estimate. However, as I said, Iam very confident that we will get there.

We have allocated a total of $7.7m of the$30m initiative for both family support andprograms for children with disabilities in care.There are three components to the programand they involve varying levels of support forfamilies, depending on their needs. The firstone is the Kids in Care program, whichprovides additional funding for children withdisabilities in care. The second two are new.The Intensive Family Support programprovides families with packages of support upto $25,000. It aims to support families at risk ofbreakdown and to prevent children fromcoming into the care of my departmentbecause their families cannot cope any longer.The other program is a Flexible Family Supportprogram that provides families who areaccessing non-Government service providerswith flexible support.

The breakdown of our estimate is 22children with disabilities in care, 110 childrenaccessing intensive family support and 130families accessing the flexible family support.As I said, it is an estimate, but the delays thatwere experienced in getting the program upand running are no longer with us. Theprogram is running and the budget is there forit. I see no reason why we will not meet theestimate. In fact, we might even supersede it,happily.

Mr BEANLAND: We wait to see that. Iturn to page 14 of the MPS, the OutputStatement. What reasons other than wet

weather caused delays in developing respiteservices so that 0% was achieved against a90% target? Why will 100% of the target notbe reached in 1999-2000? That is under theTimeliness section.

Ms BLIGH: The respite program of thedepartment focused on facilities in both northQueensland and Brisbane south. Funds of$1.2m were allocated under the mid-yearreview of the Unmet Need initiative of theprevious Government in 1997-98 for theconstruction and operation of day respitecentres on the Gold Coast and in northQueensland. The Gold Coast facility is now upand running. It was completed on 30 July so itis not recorded in this MPS, but it is now upand running.

The service providers in north Queenslandwere very concerned that what was reallyneeded in north Queensland was notnecessarily a bricks and mortar facility. Theywere also concerned that there had been verylittle consultation with the sector and serviceproviders in the region about what theyactually needed. During a period of someconsiderable consultation significant supportwas found for funding of flexible models forboth in and out of home respite on anindividual basis.

We are in the process at the moment ofdetermining the final allocation of northQueensland funds. In consultation with thedisability services sector we have put out adiscussion paper proposing that the funds thatwere allocated in the first instance for theoperation of a single service located inTownsville be allocated between Townsvilleand some of the outlying areas so that thosepeople who are most in need of respite canaccess it in the towns in which they live. I thinkthat will be a much better model for the peoplein that area. I am confident that we are ontarget. We have already met 50%. The facilityon the Gold Coast was operational since 30July and the north Queensland facility is thesubject of a final discussion paper todetermine allocation.

Mr BEANLAND: I refer to page 12 of theMPS and to future developments for disabilityservices. The five dot points on that page statethat the new separate department, DisabilityServices Queensland, will be able to undertakeits new mandate, especially its publishedresponsibilities, to—

"... ensure that a strategic approach todisability issues is developed acrossGovernment;

lift the profile of disability issues ...


establish a clear role for Government inenabling people with disabilities to access,participate in and contribute to theircommunities; and develop innovative ways to build a strongpartnership with the Disability Sector."

How can this be done without additionalinfrastructure and resources? You have alsoindicated that there is to be no increase inbudget or staff in establishing this new agency.How can these additional responsibilities beundertaken?

Ms BLIGH: Part of it is a cultural shift,determining our internal priorities, leadershipand determining new ways of doing things. Irefer to some of your previous questions in thisregard. My information is that upgrading anSES 2 position to an SES 3 position bringswith it a total cost on an annual basis of about$5,000. A decision, for example, to changethe home garaging policy of the departmentwould see, with the simple change of one carnot being home garaged any more, a savingof $10,000 to the department. Thisdepartment administers a very significantbudget. We have the challenge before us ofmanaging the targets that we have ourselveswithin our budget. They are managementdecisions and they will be taken as needed aswe go along. Part of it is about resources.There is no doubt about that. Part of it is abouthow we do the business that we do. Some ofthat requires significant rethinking and itinvolves work with our non-Governmentpartners. I am very confident that part of whatwe need is, as I said earlier, a cultural shift onboth the part of Government and non-Government providers. We need some newmechanisms to drive that shift and that is whatthis agency will be doing.

Mr BEANLAND: Page 15 of the MPS listssome total amounts. I understand there issome money in there for the QueenslandDisability Sector Training Fund, which is to bemanaged by the Australian Human ResourcesInstitute. What will the institute do with thefunding and how will it assist Queenslanderswith disabilities?

Ms BLIGH: The whole question of staffdevelopment and training right across thedepartment has been neglected for a verylong time. Not surprisingly in anunderresourced context, the department hasfor a long time done everything it can to getthe resources that it has out into servicedelivery. On many occasions that has beendone at the expense of the development ofour own staff and giving them career

opportunities and the opportunities to developtheir expertise and build on their experience.The training and development strategy thathas been worked on in the department is onethat I think will see significant improvements inour response in that regard. We made adecision to look at the Australian HumanResource Institute to manage a training fundon behalf of the department. I might ask thedirector-general to give you some more detailson that.

Mr SMITH: The Minister approved thatsector-wide training and skills developmentstrategy in May of this year. Funds were setaside from the Unmet Needs allocation fortraining and skills development sector-wide—not just in the Government sector butalso in the non-Government sector—to look ata range of work force planning issues and skilldevelopment within that work force. To achievethat, $800,000 was set aside in that trust fundto be supplemented as required, and stepshave been taken to develop that work forceplanning strategy. That is within a moregeneral context of improving training anddevelopment for professional staff of bothorganisations—the new Disability ServicesQueensland as well as the Department ofFamilies, Youth and Community Care—andsignificantly increasing funding for tertiarycourses for both people's first, orundergraduate, degree or postgraduatedegrees through the SARASS study andassistance programs.

Mr BEANLAND: I refer to page 14 of theMPS and to the number of families needingfunding under family support initiatives. Whatdata does the department have in relation tounmet needs of children with disabilities andtheir families caring for them, and how did thedepartment collect that data?

Ms BLIGH: The majority of theinformation that we have about children withdisabilities and the families that are caring forthem has been gathered by people contactingthe department and seeking help. At thisstage, we do not have a registration of needprocess for children. That process has notbeen put in place for children and I am notconfident at this stage that that is theappropriate process by which we might gatherthe data. Many of the children who will beaccessing the intensive support and familysupport programs are children and familieswho are already known to the departmentbecause of an inability to access services inthe past, and they will be the ones who aregetting priority. But if you would like somemore information on how we are doing that,


we can ask the Program Director, DisabilityProgram to give us some more information.

Mr FRANCIS: Initially, we did a surveythrough the department and through non-Government providers which identified some70 families who had a requirement forintensive support, that is, the sort of supportthat meant that their family was in urgent needof assistance to prevent breakdown and wherethe children within those families were at highrisk of coming into the care of the departmentthrough the director-general. The IntensiveFamily Support initiative was predicated uponthat research. That research also went furtherand looked at broad policy initiatives that ledus to construct the subsequent Flexible FamilySupport initiative. The question you asked alsorelated to the extent to which we areaddressing unmet need within families anddeveloping the registration process for UnmetNeeds. Currently, work is under way to extendthe Unmet Needs registration process, whichat the moment deals with adults, to families. Ido not have a specific time frame as to whenthat process will be delivered, but it is a prioritypiece of work at the moment.

Mr BEANLAND: You ask people toregister as you have for the adults; is that whatyou are saying?

Ms BLIGH: We have not as yet, but weare at the moment investigating whether thecurrent registration of need process is suitablefor families and children and, if not, whether aslightly amended process might be, as I said,a corollary to the existing one. It might be thatyou would have different panel members withsome particular expertise or experience inworking with children, for example, so thatapplications on behalf of children may not beassessed by the same panel. Those are thesorts of issues that some work is currentlybeing done on. These services will be able tobe provided to some of these families longbefore that process is determined.

Mr FENLON: I refer to pages 11 and 14of your MPS and the new funding for familysupport programs and ask: how will theseprograms benefit families of children withdisabilities?

Ms BLIGH: I have already answeredsome of the questions in relation to this, but Iam pleased to have an opportunity to give theCommittee some more information. The areaof working with families is one thatdepartmental officers have personallyexperienced for a long time in not being ableto provide the resources. I think that there area number of families out there who we will

have a much greater chance of working withand providing them with the necessary supportso that they can actually care for their ownchildren in their family context, as many of thefamilies who come into contact with ourdepartment want to do but have to date beenunable to do because they could not accessvery many support services. A number ofchildren who have come into our care andprotection are there not because they are atrisk of harm, but because their parents areunable without appropriate support services tocontinue the task of providing family support tothat particular child, particularly given that anumber of these families often have otherchildren who also have needs andrequirements.

What the program that we are putting inplace means is that, if a child has a disability,their family now can get flexible supportdesigned to meet their needs. It might be insome cases counselling, in other cases itmight be housework, it might be to assist thechild in helping them to access existingcommunity services. Previously only limitedrespite was available and families had to takewhat they could get. This is really about tryingto work with families to design—it is along thelines that I was talking about earlier in relationto the local area coordination services—what itis that their family needs to support them withthis particular child. Their family needs may bevery different to another family's needs. Wehave accepted responsibility with this newfunding program for supporting families withchildren with disabilities and trying to provideservices that mean, as I said, children do notunnecessarily come into our care.

Mr FENLON: I refer to page 14 of yourMPS and the reference in the 1999-2000budget of 4,126 people receiving respite. Iask: are you confident that this target will bereached?

Ms BLIGH: Yes. Respite can be providedin a number of ways. It can be provided byspecialised respite services or centres or it canbe provided through individual packages ofsupport. Some of the new initiatives in 1998-99 that will contribute to our capacity to meetthis target include, firstly, as I have outlinedbefore, the Gold Coast Family SupportService, which is operating a day respiteservice. It had been operating in a temporaryfacility since November 1998 but now has itspermanent facility on board in July 1999.There have been two rounds of funding foradult lifestyle support packages. There hasbeen an allocation of non-recurrent funding toa number of respite services in north


Queensland, and we are still going through theprocess of determining the outcome forpermanent recurrent funding for a number ofthose services.

Emergency respite funding of $500,000has been provided to non-Government respiteservice providers over the last 12 months. Thatfunding in the last 12 months has alreadyresulted in a significant increase in peoplereceiving respite. At the time the MPS wasbeing put together this data was not availableto us, but results from the May 1999 censuswhich compiles what is known as the minimumdata set under the Commonwealth/StateDisability Agreement shows that total respiteusers in Queensland have increased from4,046 in 1998 to 4,446 in 1999. It is anincrease of 400 users, which means that ourtarget of 4,126 has already been wellexceeded and I would anticipate that that sortof growth would continue.

Since the data has been collected, thereis another round of lifestyle support funding inthe pipeline. I have started to approve some ofthose packages now. Flexible family supportand intensive family support services havebeen established and families are beginning toaccess that. A significant amount of thatfunding can be allocated for both in home andout of home respite services. When anindividual or the family gets the money, theycan then go and get respite. I am veryconfident that our target in that regard will bemet—it has already been met—and I am veryconfident that it will be superseded.

Ms NELSON-CARR: I take you back topages 11 and 14 of your MPS where you havereferred to individual adult lifestyle supportpackages. I ask you to explain how thesepackages are allocated.

Ms BLIGH: I think if I go through thisprocess it might help the Committee tounderstand why the process is not one thatcan be rushed and why it is not a speedyprocess. It has built into it a number of points,both an opportunity for communityinvolvement and for significant accountabilitymeasures. First of all, the first stage is topublicly advertise the public funding round,which has not always been the case. Therewere certainly times in the past when so littlefunds were available that there was no pointgoing through a public advertisement; simplythose people who were in emergency crisis gotaccess to them.

People are then able to apply for apackage and they register their need. Theapplication is assessed by regional priority

panels which comprise both departmentalrepresentatives and, in three of our fiveregions, the panels also compriserepresentatives of the non-Government sector.Having community representatives on thepanel has been successful. The fact that thereare only three out of the five is an indicationthat we were not sure how that would go andneither was the community, and we trialled it inthree regions. It has been very successful andit is likely to be implemented in all regions inthe next funding round.

Priority panels meet and assessapplications from right across their region.There is one in each region. So it is about localpeople on the ground having knowledge ofwhat is available and what the services are.They are assessed according to a number ofset criteria. So it is not simply a matter ofmaking a determination, for example, aboutthe level of someone's disability or the natureof their disability. The sorts of criteria that areassessed are the risk that person may be at ofsome violence or abuse in their currentcircumstances, the age or health of theirprimary carer, the temporary nature orotherwise of their current supportarrangements, the risk that there might be ofthem having some involvement in the criminaljustice system, homelessness, whether theperson is at risk of institutionalisation orwhether they have deteriorating abilitiesbecause of insufficient support or the nature oftheir disability.

The panels then prioritise the applicationon the basis of that assessment. It prioritisespeople into four different priority areas. Priority1 indicates people who are at immediate tohigh risk, extremely critical and in urgent needof some form of immediate intervention.Priority 2 recognises high to moderate risk inthe near future. Priority 3 is at potentialmoderate to low risk in the longer term andpriority 4 is people who need some support toenhance their general quality of life.

Each region makes recommendations forfunding based on the priorities that areestablished by the panels. One of the issueswith this model is that the person in crisis maymiss out on a package because they live in anarea where there are lots of other people incritical need, while someone with a lowerpriority might get a package because they livein an area where the need is not so great. Totry to balance that possibility, we also have acentral moderation process where 20% of theavailable funds are held in a central pool toallocate to people on a Statewide basis.


One of the advantages of this model isthat people then get an opportunity when theyhave had their package approved by me inprinciple to negotiate with service providers. Sothe power is in the hands of individuals. Whilethe money goes to the service they nominate,they can move it at any time if they not happywith the service.

The CHAIRMAN: With reference to page9 of your MPS, I am particularly interested inthe participation of young people inGovernment decisions that affect their lives.What initiatives have been put in place tomeet Labor's commitment to include youngpeople in this decision-making process?

Ms BLIGH: We came into Governmentwith a commitment to improving theparticipation of young people in the decisionsof Government that may affect their lives. It isnot an easy business. We have a very wideState and young people are not ahomogeneous group. Our departmentcategorises young people as people up to 25.There is a great difference between a 15 yearold, a 19 year old and a 24 year old. They areat very different stages of their lives.Nevertheless we think it is important thatpeople in this age demographic have anopportunity to know what Government isdoing, to be part of the decision-makingprocess and to have a capacity to influenceand shape Government activity.

We have put together a draft strategy,which we circulated for consultation in Augustand September of this year. The consultationsclosed on 17 September. The strategy we putforward is just a proposal, and I am hopefulthat some of the consultations would havedrawn out other ideas from individuals andfrom people in organisations that work withyoung people. I think it is fair to say that,because of the diverse nature of youngpeople, no one strategy is going to work. Wehave to have a sort of jigsaw, if you like, ofthings that will be attractive to different sorts ofpeople.

The strategy proposes firstly a youthadvisory council, which would advise me as theyouth Minister and would also be available toadvise other Ministers who might have aninterest in young people's views on particularproposals—particularly other Ministers whohave responsibility for young people, such asthe Education Minister.

We have proposed an interactive web sitefor young people. We actually have that upand running. We put it forward as part of thispackage, but it is up and running. It is called

Generate. It is very much in its first stages, butwe anticipate that over time it will be for thosepeople who have access to computertechnology and the Internet—that number isgrowing at a very rapid rate for that agedemographic—an opportunity for them toactually access Government information. Also,it is interactive in the sense that it will givethem the opportunity to feed back on particularideas. So particular Ministers could put out aproposal and, instead of putting out just aconsultation paper, actually put some materialon to the web site and young people would beasked to immediately provide some feedback.We also anticipate that it will be interactive inthe sense that Ministers of the Government willbe available to talk on line with people. We arein the processing of organising the Premier asthe first on-line chat host. We are lookingforward to that.

The strategy also proposes looking atways of getting more young people, whereappropriate, on Government boards anddecision-making bodies. We are looking ateither a registry of young people with aninterest or at somehow amending orrefocusing the existing registries of people withan interest on boards and looking at providingsome resources where there are existing locallevel consultative networks of young peoplethat are obviously effective and working butwhich might just need a bit of support.

We have had over 300 individualfeedback forms. They have not been collatedfor my consideration yet. We are well on trackto having those things up and running by theend of this year and early into the new year.

The CHAIRMAN: Would you be able tooutline for the Committee the initiatives youhave established to help meet theGovernment's jobs target?

Ms BLIGH: I am very pleased to have anopportunity to discuss this matter with theCommittee. Often I think people assume thatthe only departments that drive job creationare those that have large constructionbudgets, but there are many areas in mydepartment which are seeing significant jobgrowth, particularly in the non-Governmentsector, and job growth for sections of thelabour market that would not be able to accessjob growth that is created through, say, capitalworks programs.

In disability services, for example, it isestimated that the $30m disability initiative willcreate more than 800 jobs when all programsare fully implemented in this financial year.That is using a notional figure of about


$35,000 per job. That is about the averagewage in this industry. For example, in northQueensland that will mean over 90 jobsalone—and they will be permanent jobs. It isestimated further that there will be anadditional 19 permanent jobs created as partof the Basil Stafford initiative to support peoplewishing to move out of that institution.

In the child protection area, I have alreadytalked about the 30 extra frontline staff we putinto the area last year and the 70 new workersin the next financial year. The number of newfrontline workers will rise to an extra 250 in theyear 2002.

A significant amount of the funding thathas been made available to respond to therecommendations of the Forde inquiry will alsobe allocated to the community sector, whichwill see the creation of jobs in this area of work.Those jobs will be spread right across bothregional and remote Queensland.

Our department has also played its role inthe Government's traineeship program. Overthe past financial year the department hasengaged 74 trainees across the State. Wherethe retention of successful trainees within thedepartment is possible, they will be offeredongoing temporary or permanent work. Thedepartment is expecting to engage a further80 trainees over this financial year.

Our jobs strategy is not only aboutcreating new jobs but also about making surethat we secure the jobs in particular industriesand provide some support and assistance toindustries in which jobs might be under threat.The child-care sector is an example of anindustry where in many areas its viability isunder threat. Soon I will be taking to Cabinet astrategic plan for the industry which will alsopropose a review of the regulatory framework,and various funding initiatives are in place tohelp maintain the viability of an industry that isa bit shaky at the moment.

The Youth Justice Construction programwill also lead to a number of positions. InStage 1 at Wacol, in the new centre, we wouldanticipate 230 positions over the constructionperiod. At Cleveland we anticipateapproximately 87 positions to be created in theTownsville area over the two years.

Ms NELSON-CARR: What impact is theGST expected to have on the clients of yourdepartment?

Ms BLIGH: I thank the member for thequestion. The impact of the GST could bequite significant. I am happy to outline myconcerns about it to the Committee. The GST,as you know, has been touted by the

Commonwealth Government as the simpletax. As predicted by many people at the time,the devil is in the detail and the impact on theoperations of the community sector are yet tobe fully realised.

Most welfare service provision agencieswill be categorised as GST free. What thatmeans is that organisations providing GST-freeservices are not obliged to charge a goodsand services tax on any fees that they maylevy. Child care is a good example of that.Child-care providers do not have to charge agoods and services tax to parents using thefacilities. However, they will be required toactually pay the GST on goods and servicesthat they purchase. So again, the child-carecentre will accrue GST on fuel, office rent, foodfor children, toys, etc. If they are providing aGST-free service, they will be able to claimback the GST that they have paid, usually atthe end of the quarter.

While there may be on the face of it nonet financial difference, there will be significantadditional administrative and financial timingcosts in paying and recording the GST up frontand then claiming it back later. I think it isimportant to understand that many of theorganisations I fund are very smallorganisations. Their management committeesare actually volunteer managementcommittees. In my view, this may constitute avery significant impost on a number of them.

A major issue, though, for the departmentis the advice we have received from theAustralian Taxation Office, which has beenconfirmed by Queensland Treasury. Grantspaid by my department will themselves besubject to the GST. That is, recipientorganisations will be liable to pay a 10% tax onthe grant they have received. While theFederal legislation has excluded from the GSTgrants paid as gifts, any grant that hasconditions attached to it will accrue a GST.Obviously, every Government grant hasconditions and therefore will attract a 10% tax.

We are in the process of negotiating withTreasury and the Australian tax office, but itwould appear at this stage that what we will beforced to do is add 10% to the grant that wemake to an organisation, which will then haveto pay one-eleventh of the grant to theAustralian tax office. The department will thenhave to seek to recoup from the tax office that10% on every grant that we pay. So much, Iwould say, for the simple tax. If this issimplification, then I am glad they did not try tomake it more complicated.


This, I think, has significant implicationsfor any Government department that is makinggrants into the non-Government sector. Mydepartment is not alone in this problem. TheFederal Government made its grants to theStates GST free but did not see fit to makegrants from the States to GST-freeorganisations GST free. So there will besignificant administrative charges. It is shapingup, I think, to be a boon for accountants.

Ms NELSON-CARR: I refer to the OutputStatement on page 19, specifically thereference to the grants administration costs forcommunity grants. What initiatives will drive thereduction in these costs?

Ms BLIGH: I thank the honourablemember for the question. When I came intothis portfolio I was surprised at the number offunding programs we administer, the way theyare administered and the size of the programsthat warranted a separate administrationprogram. I would say that the system Iinherited made Yes, Minister look efficient, andwe are in the business of trying to fix it.

In my department at the present time wehave 48 different funding programs ranging insize from $110m, which is the DisabilityProgram, to $62,000, which is a program forchild health and safety in the Office of ChildCare. Organisations receiving funds from theseprograms have a separate service agreementfor every one of them. Moreover, the serviceagreements are based on the fundingprogram that the money has come from, noton the actual services being provided.

For example, an organisation seeking toprovide a range of services to young womenmight need to go to a domestic violenceprogram for some funds, to one of many youthprograms to seek additional funds and to theCommunity and Individual Support Programfor further funds—and that is only within myown department. They may have similarproblems in other Government departments.So it is no surprise that some organisationsjust cannot see the point of signing serviceagreements. For organisations they do notadd value; they just add red tape.

Also, each service agreement has aseparate set of payments going to servicesand funding accountability coming to thedepartment. Each service agreement has tobe renewed every year. Despite this processbeing based on sound financial managementprinciples, it has been unable so far todocument the outcomes that are actuallyachieved by Government for the fundingprovided.

I can now say that the department is wellplaced to replace this outdated system andallow people to focus on providing servicesand to minimise the red tape they experience.Firstly, we will effectively be replacing the entiremyriad of 48 funding programs with onefunding program. We are also fixing theproblem of multiple service agreementsthrough the whole-of-Government CommunityServices Strategy, in which my department willbe playing its part, and introducing a singlestandard service agreement. That agreementwill then be for three years so that people arenot having to reapply for funds every year.Attached to the single agreement will be aseries of service plans that reflect the actualservices an organisation provides, not thebureaucratic source of the funding. We willalso be seeking information about theperformance of services and, as such, we willbe seeking to introduce a system ofperformance reporting, which includesinformation about outcomes where possibleand appropriate, and the work that fundedorganisations are carrying out.

It will take us some time to put all of this inplace, but I think it will make a significantdifference. Many organisations have said tome, "Yes, there are inefficiencies in our sector,but most of them are caused by therequirements of Government", and we havean obligation, I think, to make our processesas simple as possible so that theseorganisations can get on with the business ofproviding services to their clients and to do it ina way that is as cost-effective as possible.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, in the MPS atpage 10, note 4, I notice a reference there to:"In 1998-99 the Department also receivedunanticipated revenue from services andassets below fair value." What revenue wasthat, and what were the assets, Minister?

Ms BLIGH: I think it is probably best inthis instance for me to refer you to the ActingDirector of Service Strategy.

Mr O'BRIEN: It is mainly to do withservices received from other Governmentdepartments. For example, we get theDepartment of Police to do some work in termsof ensuring that child-care workers and childprotection workers do not have criminalhistories. So it is mostly to do with the workthat the police do, which they do for no cost.But we need, through an accrual accountingprocess, to count that cost as an assetreceived at below fair value.

Mr BEANLAND: I understand that is aservice, but where does the asset come in? I


understand what you are saying there about aservice being provided, but where is the asset?It says "services and assets".

Mr O'BRIEN: The assets are to do withthe fit-out work that is undertaken by ProjectServices on our behalf, which is not part of ourexpenditure budget. So Project Services holdan allocation for fit-out of officeaccommodation, which they do on a projectbasis through a year, which is not part of ourbudget, but we have to count it as our assetbecause it is our office.

Mr BEANLAND: If you say so.

Ms BLIGH: Welcome to accrualaccounting!

Mr BEANLAND: I did not think it wasanything to do with accrual accounting—farfrom it. I do not believe that for a moment. Infact, we have not heard that word mentioned.It is to do with Public Works or ProjectServices.

Ms BLIGH: I am happy to explain that.Basically, the money that is held by PublicWorks for office fit-out is not part of ourbudget. The service is provided, they fit out theoffice, and it then is our asset. So underaccrual terms, it has to be recorded.

Mr BEANLAND: All right. But the fact isthat it is your money.

Mr O'BRIEN: In 1999-2000, it is ourmoney; they are transferring those budgets tous. But in previous years, Project Services hasheld the budget.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, I refer to theMPS on page 24. I am inquiring how youcould be so accurate with the Estimates for thepercentage of indigenous youth in detentioncentres right down to the decimal point of apercentage: 56.8%—right on target in relationto this. Do you see it there, the second itemunder "Quantity": "% of youth detention centrepopulation of Indigenous background"? Thetarget for 1998-99 was 56.8%. The Actual for1998-99 is 56.8%—spot-on. Minister, how canthat be so?

Ms BLIGH: The member would be awarethat this is the first year that Governmentdepartments have been required to report inthe MPS on an output-based model and thefirst time that this material has actually beencollected in this way. What it has required ofthe department is to actually sit down and workout what are the output measures that we areseeking to measure so that we can tellwhether we have achieved what we areseeking to achieve by the programs we haveput in place. I would be the first to say that that

is not an accurate business, and we may findthat, over the process of output budgeting inthe next two or three years, those figures willhave to be revised or, in fact, other outputmeasures found; because measuring humanservices is never an easy business.

There was no Estimate in 1998-99. It wasa requirement of Treasury that that had to beput in there. So 56.8% is, in fact, the numberat the date that the measure was taken for thepurpose of recording in the MPS. What we aresaying there is that we are seeking to have a1.3% decrease. We would hope to actuallyachieve and better that target.

Mr BEANLAND: I understand that. Butthe point is that the Estimate is not anEstimate at all.

Ms BLIGH: It is the Actual.Mr BEANLAND: The Actual figure you put

in—whichever day and whoever did it. Ipresume, Minister, that the same applies forthe next point. You are having a little cook ofthe books again. I think this refers to thenumber of admissions to community-basedorders, where you get 3,666. Of course, thatwas the target in 1998-99. Again, the Actualfor 1998-99 was the same figure: 3,666. Andthe next set of figures is the same again.

Ms BLIGH: That is right. This is an entirelynew system. It is bound to have a few teethingproblems. The figures recorded in the firstcolumn are Actuals, not Estimates, becausethere was, in fact, no Estimate last year. Themeaningful data here is the last column, andthe movement between the second and thethird column. It is inevitable that, when you aremoving to a new system of accounting andmeasuring, you will have these sorts of issuesin the first year. This is something that you willnot see in the next MPS, because we nowhave the Estimate for 1999-2000, and that iswhat will be recorded.

Mr BEANLAND: Only if you have notestimated it before; you are quite right.

Ms BLIGH: We were not required toestimate it before. I will ask the director-generalto answer that question in terms of howoutput-based budgeting has been put forwardby Treasury.

Mr SMITH: Clearly, they are the same,because if the target had been set after weknew what the Actual was, it would have alsobeen a nonsense. If we knew, when we setthe target for this publication, that the Actualwas 3,666 and set the target at 3,800, it wouldhave been a nonsense target. So byestablishing that, in this first year, there are


clearly targets set for 1999-2000, that will bethe base upon which judgment can then bemade in future years. But this is the first yearof outcome-based budgeting, and I am sureyou would agree it would have been anabsolute nonsense, when we knew the figurewas the fact, to actually make up an Estimatejust to create a difference.

Mr BEANLAND: You could have left it out.

Mr SMITH: I mean, there is somestandardisation in Government that we arerequired to meet.

Ms BLIGH: We have never measured thisbefore.

Mr BEANLAND: Minister, on the samepage, page 24, how do you explain that youmet a target of 15% compliance with approvedstandards for children in secure care and thatyou are only funding to meet 50% in thecurrent financial year? What additional fundshave you allocated for this? It comes underthat section of "Quality".

Ms BLIGH: Yes, that is a quality measure.It does not link with funding in that sense. It isa measure of the number of children who haveSecuring the Care plans in place inaccordance with the standards. Now, I wouldhave thought that the member forIndooroopilly would have recalled the Securingthe Care project, because it actually beganwhen the coalition was in Government. Itrelates to a new system of case planning andmanagement for young people in our care. Soat the time it was brought in—very late in thefinancial year that is being reported on here—itis a comprehensive change in the way that wecase manage in our detention centres. Again,we would hope to exceed the 50% target, butit is a case-by-case management process, so ittakes some time to implement. Tomorrow wecould have five new young people come intothe centre. Because they cannot havemanagement plans in place straight away ittakes some time to put them in place. So youwill never have 100% unless you had no newadmissions.

Mr BEANLAND: What additional fundshave you allocated for this?

Ms BLIGH: It does not require extrafunding; it is about doing the work that we dodifferently and doing the work that we dobetter. This Securing the Care plan is just aname for a new management system ofputting in place case management for eachchild in a detention centre. Those youthworkers who are already working in a facility willbe working with the professionals that weemploy on a case by case basis, or on a

regular basis, such as psychiatrists,psychologists and people involved withvocational education and training, etc. Thosepeople will all sit down and work through aSecuring the Care plan for a young person.This will determine their progress through thedetention system. When it is in place, it will bethe basis of that young person's experience inthe system. It does not require extra funding. Itis a matter of how we manage the childrenand how we use the resources we have.

Mr BEANLAND: I accept that, but I wouldhave thought that in that case we would havegot to 100% instead of 15% to 50%.

Ms BLIGH: We may get significantlyhigher than 50, but I go back to what I wassaying: it is unlikely that, unless you have nothad any admissions in a month—which isprobably pretty well unheard of in ourdetention centres—you would never have100%.

Mr BEANLAND: That is why I raised theissue of additional money to do this, but thereis none. I get the story.

Ms BLIGH: Do you get it?

Mr BEANLAND: Yes, I do. There is noadditional funding for it.

Ms BLIGH: It is not required.Mr SMITH: Could I clarify the situation?

The issue is that every child in a detentioncentre has a case plan. Securing the Care is acomprehensive system of case planning whichis to be implemented over time and, given thatit has been implemented within existingresources, it is being implemented realistically.But it will mean comprehensive planningbetween a range of agencies to ensure thatyoung people's needs do not fall through thecracks.

Ms BLIGH: No matter how much moneyyou put into it, you could not at any time saythat you had 100% unless you had noadmissions for a period of time.

Mr BEANLAND: But you could get closerto it.

Ms BLIGH: Yes, certainly. What we havetried to do in setting our performance targets isset targets that we realistically believe we canmeet. In many areas we hope to exceedthem.

Mr BEANLAND: Could I move on to theMoving Ahead program. I refer to page 12 ofthe MPS and the output statement on page14. In the output statement you have shown afigure of some $16.8m on both estimates andactual expenditure for the last financial year.


The Estimate for the current financial year isagain $16m. You indicate on page 12 that themajority of people in that program requireongoing assistance. Presumably, others will beadded to the scheme. Last financial year, howmany people were in the scheme and howmany do you expect to be in the scheme thisfinancial year?

Ms BLIGH: Let me get the numbers foryou of the people who are actually in thescheme. We are in the process of allocatingplaces for this year. It is in the vicinity of 500young people who are in the scheme at themoment. I will get the correct figure for you in amoment. There will be approximately 160young people in the scheme in future years.

The program is one with which I assumeyou are familiar because it was put in place asa short-term political stop-gap by yourGovernment when it was unable to make anylong-term commitment to disability funding,and when it found itself with a difficulty in theAnti-Discrimination Commission from a familywho had taken the Government to task overthe fact that their young child, who had adisability, had to leave school with noresources. The Government of the day—aGovernment of which you were a part—put inplace what is called the Moving Aheadprogram where young people were put on theprogram with a two-year deadline. They weretold, "Here is something for two years and thenyou fall off the cliff." You knew that the two-year deadline would conveniently fall after thenext election. Presumably, it meant you hadno intention of winning the next election, forwhich I am very grateful.

Mr BEANLAND: I would not say that atall—far from it, in fact.

Ms BLIGH: You would have inherited thesame political problem that I inherited, andthat was nearly 500 young people who hadbeen getting a service for two years and forwhich there was no budget planning. Thereare 511 young people who are currentlyreceiving funding under the program.

The program was evaluated and it wasfound to be a good example of a flexibleprogram and many people are accessingservices in very different ways. It wassupposed to be a transition program whereyoung people would go through two years oftransition from the school environment into,supposedly, a work environment. But, ofcourse, the young people on this program, forthe most part, are young people who, becauseof the very nature of their disabilities, areunlikely to ever enter the paid work force or to

be able to transition to something like a TAFEcollege.

The evaluation found that about 20% ofthe young people on the program would beable to make that transition intoCommonwealth employment programs. As aresult of that, there would be some vacanciesin the program. We anticipate that theprogram will continue to operate on that basis,in the sense that at the end of two years therewill be some assessment and those peoplewho are able to move into a Commonwealthemployment program would do so. However,the people who were not able to do that—thatis, those young people with the most highsupport needs and whose disabilities woulddisadvantage them the most—would be givencertainty forever under our Government. Weare not going to kick them out after two years.We are not going to leave their families in thelurch. It does not mean that some member ofthe family will have to stop working in order tosupport them full-time. It does not mean thatpeople have to stop being breadwinners, andall the other things that you left us with. Wethink we have found a pretty good solution.

Mr BEANLAND: We picked up the thingsthat you left behind, Minister. The Ministerseems to forget that these things keep goingaround. I refer to page 9 of the MPS. Howwould you characterise world's best practice inrelation to child protection services when 30%of children in the care of your department havehad multiple placements in 1998-99 and youhave only proposed a 5% improvement in thecurrent financial year?

Ms BLIGH: I am just looking at the tableon page 9. You are looking at the percentageof children who have had only one placementin the last 12 months?

Mr BEANLAND: Yes.

Ms BLIGH: We are trying to be accuratein our measurement. The actual figure for1997-98 was 68.3%. It is considered adequatepractice, not world's best practice. Our realconcern is not so much with the 70% ofchildren who are not having more than oneplacement. At the other end of the spectrumwe have about 10% of children who havemore than three placements within 12 months.A much smaller percentage has even more in12 months. These are the children who are atsignificant risk of long-term damage as a resultof constant placement turnover.

There is nothing in that table that doesnot confirm the material that is already on thepublic record and which was established by thecommission of inquiry into child protection in


this State. As I said, it took us nearly a centuryto get to this position. It is going to take us awhile to find our way out of it. The resourcesthat we have put into the budget this year—some of which I have already outlined—will goto putting in some greater support around thechildren who are at risk of placement turnover,and around the foster families who take on thetask of rearing those children.

We anticipate that it will have an effectover time, but it will not happen overnight.There are only eight months left of thisfinancial year. We are trying to be realisticabout the rate and pace of change. We aretalking about some very complex casematters. You cannot buy a fix to that. Youhave to work very carefully to put the child withthe right foster family and find support from thecommunity that can support that whole unit ifwe are going to have any chance of reducingplacement turnover.

Mr BEANLAND: The reason why I raisedthis question is because of the Forde inquiryrecommendations. I regularly hear you talkabout world's best practice—

Ms BLIGH: That is what we are aimingfor.

Mr BEANLAND: You continually raise it.You talk about implementing the Forde inquiryrecommendations. I suggest to you thatmoving from 70 to 75%—an increase of only5% in this financial year—is totally inadequateif you are moving towards meeting thoserecommendations.

Ms BLIGH: Again, it may be a target thatwe will exceed. This is a target that we haveset ourselves and we are very hopeful aboutmeeting our targets in many areas andexceeding them. Again, this is the firsttime—and I will say again—that thedepartment has reported in this way. It isdifficult to estimate in advance, having neverdone this in advance, what the change maybe, but if you look at the rate of changebetween 1997-98 and our actual in 1998-99,as I said, in 1997-98, it was 68.3 so we havehad an increase in that financial year, but thatwas without extra resources. So with the extraresources that we are putting in, we believethat we will double the rate of improvementand at that kind of rate, we will have anexponential improvement that will certainlymake a difference.

I have to say that, until now—andcertainly under your Government—there wasnever any publication of any targets. Nobodyever set a target for themselves. I think thateverybody knows that if you are trying to

actually improve anything, to set a target andto set a goal is one of the first things that doyou. That is what we have done, but it is arealistic target. For the 5% of children who weare able to achieve it for, it will make a realdifference to their lives.

Mr BEANLAND: I refer again to page 9 ofthe MPS. In your output statement for servicesfor children and young people you have aseries of criteria purportedly to indicate quality.One of them is the increased proportion ofyoung people in designated target groupsaccessing services. How does mere contactwith a service indicate the quality of thatservice or anything else? Why do you not lookfor behavioural and developmental changes toreflect the quality of services funded by yourdepartment?

Ms BLIGH: That quality measure isactually in relation to the services fundedunder the youth program. It is accessed by avery, very broad cross-section of young peopleranging from the Duke of Edinburgh Awards toyouth development programs and youthservice coordinators in schools. This is one ofthose areas where it is a difficult thing todetermine what is an appropriate measure ofthe quality of the work that we do. It may bethat a young person might come into theyouth service in Dalby only once, but havingaccessed it, they might have a piece ofinformation that makes a very big difference intheir lives. That is not something that we canactually test. These are not young people inthe care of the department; these are youngpeople who we do not necessarily ever havecontact with again.

We are trying to measure access to ourservices and making sure that our services areaccessible by the broadest possible range ofyoung people, which is why we are trying toensure that the services that we fund toprovide the services to youth are beingaccessed by young people from a range oftarget groups. Again, this might be one thatwe can refine over time as we get moreexperienced and practised at the art ofmeasuring the outcomes of human servicedelivery.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. Icall the member for Mundingburra.

Ms NELSON-CARR: I refer to the lastparagraph on page 18 of the MPS and thetransfer of victims of crime community grantfunding of $6.3m to the Department ofFamilies, Youth and Community Care.Minister, can you explain to this Committee


why the transfer has occurred? What are theanticipated benefits?

Ms BLIGH: Yes, thank you. Thedepartment is very pleased to have theopportunity to work further with this group ofpeople in our community. I am very pleased totake the question. You would be aware thatmy ministerial colleague the Honourable theAttorney-General has already responded tosome questions from a previous EstimatesCommittee.

From the outset, I want to put on thepublic record and assure the Committee thatthere has been no decrease in funding forvictims of crime organisations. In fact, whenLabor came into Government, we allocated anextra $1m to victims of crime organisations tosupport people who had experienced crimes.Under the former coalition Government—infact, under the leadership of the member forIndooroopilly—in the 1997-98 Budget, $1mwas allocated to victims of crime but only$474,000 of it was actually spent. In the pastyear, however—

Mr BEANLAND: You did not think of ituntil I started it.

Ms BLIGH: In the past year, Labor hasallocated $1.06m. Touchy, are they not?

Mr BEANLAND: No, I am just answering.You asked me—

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The member forIndooroopilly!

Ms BLIGH: As I think that I have outlinedcomprehensively this evening, my departmenthas a number of funding programs but we alsohave considerable expertise in administeringfunds to the non-Government sector. It is anarea that requires experience and expertiseand we are continuing to improve this throughour reform strategy.

Through the domestic violence courtsupport initiative, the department alreadydistributes funds to victims support groups andpeople who are supporting people who havegone through that experience. The transfer isreally an administrative transfer; it does notmove the responsibility for the criminal justicesystem and the interest that victims have in itto my department. All it is is a transfer acrossGovernment of administrative responsibility foradministering these funds. I am very confidentthat, with the new funding initiatives that weare putting forward, such as three-year triennialfunding and such as single serviceagreements, that, in fact, the organisationsthat receive funds through this allocation offunds will see a significant improvement in the

cutting in red tape to what they are currentlyexperiencing.

The transfer has also been supported bya number of victims groups, such as theQueensland Homicide Victims Support Group,which actually sought this transfer in a letter tothe Attorney-General; the organisation ProtectAll Children Today, which does court supportwork with children; and Citizens Against RoadSlaughter. I have also recently had indicationsfrom Project Micah, which provides support tovictims of institutional abuse and whichreceives funds under this allocation, that theysupport the transfer. So we look forward toworking with these groups. Many of them arealready providing services to clients of ourdepartment.

Mr FENLON: Minister, can you outline thebenefits of the Rural Outreach Service referredto on page 8 of your MPS?

Ms BLIGH: Yes, thank you. It is anexciting initiative. It is another example of theGovernment's commitment to regionalQueensland, specifically in child care, and toimproving the information technologyinfrastructure in the State. It is part ofimplementing an election commitment thatwas contained in the Rural Queensland NewDirections statement when we came intoGovernment and under the auspices ofQueensland Online.

In August, I approved the disbursementof $322,200 in non-recurrent funds for 82children's services in rural and remoteQueensland to be linked. Seventy-nine of theservices will receive funding to purchasecomputer hardware and software—most ofthem for the first time. Three services, whichalready have compatible computer hardware,will be funded to assist with an Internet serviceprovider and telephone costs. That will providefor these 82 services for the first time ever tobe computer linked.

The services have been funded topurchase their own equipment so that themoney stays in their local community and sothat they can receive appropriate after-salessupport. Through this link-up, the services willbe able to access information about eachother, the work that they are doing and someof the initiatives that they might be providing tochildren. It is also a direct link to the Office ofChild Care in my department, which willmoderate a bulletin board of information.There will be a 24-hour turnaround on theinformation that is posted on the board, whichwill include information about grants that might


be available, programs that can be put inplace, curriculum and training programs.

We anticipate that the whole network willbe up and running by December this year. Iam confident that this initiative will mean betterchild-care services for parents, particularly inregional and remote Queensland, and willprovide those families using those services aswell as those staff, who are often in veryremote areas and who are very isolated fromprofessional support and professionaldevelopment, with the capacity to link with theircolleagues in other towns that might be quite along way away. It is a bit of an experiment, butI think that it is an exciting initiative in remoteand regional Queensland. As I said, I lookforward to reporting on how it goes and how itimproves the working capacity of thoseservices.

Mr FENLON: Minister, in your answer tothe question on notice in relation to theInternational Year of Older Persons, youreferred to an intergenerational ad campaignto promote positive awareness around issuesof ageing. Would you please outline the costsassociated with this campaign, its goals, andhow it compares to similar advertisingcampaigns?

Ms BLIGH: Yes, thank you. A major goalof the Beattie Government has been to breakdown barriers between the generations as partof our contribution to the International Year ofOlder Persons. That is why we launched themultimedia campaign. It has the goals ofchallenging community stereotypes of bothseniors in our community and young people. Ittries to achieve a positive attitudinal changeand to look for a behavioural change in theway in which people approach each other.

The advertising is aimed at the wholecommunity, but particularly seniors and youngpeople. The total budget for the campaign is$200,000. The costs involve $85,000 for TVmedia, $48,000 for TV production, $37,000 fortransit media, $15,000 for transit production,$7,000 for photography and $2,700 for bills,posters, media and production. As I said, itcomes to a total of about $200,000. So far, wehad have a very positive response to thecampaign. The theme of the campaign isrespect. It tries to promote respect betweenolder and younger people as well as perhapstrying to find those experiences in life that theyhave in common, despite their vastly differentages.

This is a very modest but very successfulcampaign with a message for all of us thatrespect is ageless. It stands in sharp contrast

to the work of the previous Government, whichspent more than $300,000 doing exactly theopposite. The campaigns that were runagainst young people to demonise them all aspotential offenders did nothing more thanbreak down respect between older andyounger people. The juvenile offender mediacampaign operated by the member forIndooroopilly when he was Attorney-Generalaccrued the odium that it deserved. Despitethe fact that he spent $305,000 on it, it couldbe argued that no positive gain was made forany member of the community.

I am very proud of our campaign. I lookforward to seeing very soon the positivepromotion on city council buses of youngpeople as valuable of members of ourcommunity and seniors as just as valuable.That will make a nice change to some of thethings that used to be there.

Mr FENLON: Given the Government'ssupport for recommendations made by theForde inquiry in relation to ongoing counsellingand support services for former residentsabused in Queensland institutions, can yououtline what initiatives have been put in placeto reflect the Government's support?

Ms BLIGH: I think it is fair to say that therecommendations of the Forde inquiry reallyfell squarely into two camps. The bulk of therecommendations go primarily to the questionof improving our system in the future so thatsome of the practices and problemsuncovered by Mrs Forde's inquiry would indeedstay a thing of the past and would not berepeated, and that some of the gaps in ourcurrent service provision could be filled.

The other set of recommendations wentprimarily to the question of addressing the painof the past and to recognising the pain thatwas still being experienced as a result of thepast experiences of so many members of ourcommunity. The inquiry took submissions fromover 300 people, and that is just the tip of theiceberg in many respects. However, those 300individuals are part of the Queenslandcommunity. They are part of our workplaces,our school communities and ourneighbourhoods. Many of them are battlingthe odds to build their lives.

We have addressed a number of thoserecommendations. Firstly, as members wouldknow, the Government has issued, with therelevant church leaders, a joint apology toformer residents. As I announced to theParliament, a copy of this apology is on displayin the foyer. It is also on public display in thefoyer of my ministerial office and the office of


the director-general of the department. Wetook the decision that it was important, as asymbolic gesture, that the department be seenpublicly to be embracing the sentiment of theapology.

We have also established a counsellingand support service. As I outlined earlier, this iscurrently being funded by funds madeavailable through the budget savings of theForde inquiry. The funding will be sourcedthrough the new initiative in the next year. Theservice is being auspiced by RelationshipsAustralia, which has significant experience incounselling and family matters. As I said, theservice opened this week. It is located in WestEnd, but it will provide services to people fromacross the State. We will be able to do bothtelephone counselling and link people withcounsellors in their own towns. We have somefunds to do that.

We have also announced the formationof a $1m trust fund to fund the identifiedneeds of former residents. We are currently inthe process of getting legal advice on the formof the trust deed. We are negotiating with thePublic Trustee around the appropriateinvolvement of the Office of the Public Trust inthe development of the trust fund. Once thetrust is up and running, it will be completelyindependent of Government and managed bya board of trustees, as trusts are, so it isimportant that we get it right. I look forward toannouncing that in the early part of the newyear.

The CHAIRMAN: Minister, I refer to page21 of your MPS, and I ask: what earlyintervention initiatives have you put in place toreduce the incarceration of young people andtheir recidivist activity?

Ms BLIGH: A number of initiatives haveall been very innovative and some are showingearly promise. We made an electioncommitment to establish three youth justiceservices. They will be in Townsville, Ipswichand Logan. Those services will work intensivelywith young people who are on non-detentioncourt orders. They will work at that very earlystage of offending to turn the lives of thoseyoung people around. This is the first time thatwe have really put significant intensiveresources into working on a very one-to-onebasis with those young people. The servicesare actually located in the communities toassist the necessary links with the community.This will ensure that, for example, when courtsmake community service orders, there isuseful, meaningful and valuable work for theyoung offender to carry out in the community.

The Townsville service began on 23August. The Ipswich service commencedoperation last week. The Logan service iscurrently starting to function in some temporarypremises and we are having discussions withthe Logan City Council about findingpermanent premises for them.

We have made a commitment in thisbudget to making the four communityconferencing pilots a permanent feature of ourjuvenile justice system. As I have outlinedearlier, we have funded, at a significant level,the new Youth at Risk project in far-northQueensland. We have also met our electioncommitment to put in place youth crimeprevention grants that are basically accessibleby community organisations. Again, this isabout finding local solutions to local problems.I think that some of those bear someexamination and I would like to share themwith you.

The people of Aurukun secured a grant of$10,000 for a project called the Wik Manhoodproject. This project allows young men fromthe community to spend time with elders ontraditional lands, undertaking training to dowith manhood issues. I am advised that therehas been a substantial drop in the number ofyoung people appearing in court since theprogram was started. Indeed, since theimplementation of the project, no youngperson has been sentenced to detention. Asthe member for Mundingburra may know, for along time the Cleveland Youth DetentionCentre has housed a significant number ofyoung people from the Aurukun community. Ithink that the strength of that project indicateswhat can be done when people put theirminds to it and think creatively and whenGovernments are flexible enough to allowcommunities to come up with differentsolutions.

Similar projects are occurring across theState. For example, in Charleville a projectoperating across the Balonne Shire hasreceived a grant of $30,000. That project isfocusing on young people who, at this stage,are minor offenders. It involves variousdepartments in delivering life skills and workswith the police, who are undertaking campingand mentoring activities with young people.We are utilising resources and expertise, bothacross the community and across Governmentdepartments. We are very confident that thisprogram will continue to see those kinds ofresults.

The CHAIRMAN: Minister, I refer you topage 26 of your MPS and ask: in relation tothe electricity concession scheme, is this


program operational and, if so, how manyindividuals have received a concession todate?

Ms BLIGH: I am pleased to report to theCommittee that to date over 1,200 paymentshave been made to individuals under thisconcession scheme. The concession schemeis aimed at assisting seriously ill people whouse home-based life support systems such asoxygen concentrators and kidney dialysismachines that are supplied throughQueensland Health. Obvious, the electricitybills for people can be beyond their means insome circumstances.

Up to $48 per quarter per machine forusers of oxygen concentrators is available anda concession of up to $32.25 per quarter permachine is available for users of kidney dialysismachines. The concession is retrospective andpayable from 1 July 1998. It is estimated thatapproximately 2,000 Queenslanders would beeligible and will be assisted by this scheme. Itis fully operational and we started to makeinitial payments on 14 September. As I havesaid, 1,200 people have received paymentsthus far, and I am sure that it is only a matterof time before we see more people applying.

Ms NELSON-CARR: Minister, can yououtline the initiatives in your MPS that willassist the child-care sector?

Ms BLIGH: As I said earlier, the child-caresector is experiencing a number of impactsthat are threatening the viability of manyoperators and many organisations. Mostpredominantly, the cuts by the CommonwealthGovernment over the last couple of Budgets,not only cuts to the operational subsidy butalso the freezing of family allowances at about1996 levels, have had an impact. We haveseen centres closing and an increase ininformal care. The CommonwealthGovernment has announced that it will beremoving the current cap on the number ofsubsidised places in Queensland. I shouldexplain what the cap is. The cap is a planningmechanism put in place by theCommonwealth to try to ensure that we do nothave centres starting up in places where thereis really not a need or there is an existingoversupply.

It is really the only planning tool that isavailable to Government for the industry. TheFederal Minister, Jocelyn Newman, hasindicated that there has been a cap on therefor nearly three years. I think it will be removedin January this year. I have written to theFederal Minister. In Queensland, we have anumber of areas where the viability of centres

is being threatened by previous lack ofplanning and oversupply. Without operationalsubsidies and without access to reasonablelevels of rebates to meet the rising costs,families are no longer able to use the services,and centres are increasingly facing, as I said,possible closure. The removal of that planningmechanism is something that we need to bevery concerned about.

This industry is a very significant industryin Queensland. I do not know that peoplerealise that almost 30,000 people areemployed in the child-care sector, includinglong day care, family day care, vacation careand out of school care services. TheGovernment has tried to recognise thedifficulty that has been experienced by thisindustry. We have established a child-careforum, which is made up of community andindustry representatives, to develop a five-yearplan that will focus on the needs of theindustry, and it is being developed inconjunction with industry. We have made acommitment to change the regulatoryframework that guides the work of the industry.We will establish regulated standards forbackyard care. It will allow services to respondmore flexibly to the needs of parents andchildren and will facilitate the development of amuch more sustainable child-care industry,and I look forward to making anannouncement about that strategy very soon.

The Child Care Infrastructure Programwas an election commitment and initiative ofour Government to try to alleviate some of thefinancial pressures that are on services. Wecannot replace the operational subsidy thathas been ripped out by the Feds, but we cantry to relieve some budget pressures. Allowingorganisations to access funds for toys,equipment, white goods, major capital works orbuilding requirements relieves some of thepressure on their budgets so that money thatthey might have otherwise had to set aside forthose things can be put into some of theoperational issues that might keep fees downand make it more affordable for parents.

Mr BEANLAND: I refer to answer toquestion on notice No. 3, which asked fordetails about consultancies. There is anamount listed for PricewaterhouseCoopers of$121,300. I would like the details of that. I didask for the details, but you are obviously shortof ink over there; we did not get the details.

Ms BLIGH: Significant detail has beenprovided to both the member for Indooroopillyand the member for Burleigh on two separateoccasions. What I did was provide theupdate—


Mr BEANLAND: Not for this one. Youhave not given me the detail for the amount of$121,000 before?

Ms BLIGH: That is right. Theseconsultancies are all subject to data that hasalready been provided to you, but theserepresent further funds in that consultancy.You asked questions about consultancies inrelation to PricewaterhouseCoopers. I am justtrying to locate that in your questions onnotice.

Mr BEANLAND: It is No. 3.

Ms BLIGH: No, I am looking for thequestions on notice that you asked some timeago about consultancies so that I can give youthe details.

Mr BEANLAND: I will look that up. I havethat one here.

Ms BLIGH: The purpose of thePricewaterhouseCoopers consultancy is tomanage the implementation of the newSAP/R3HR payroll system using bothdepartmental and external resources. Theseare further funds that have been expended onthat consultancy since you first asked about it.All of the information and material that yousought in relation to whether it was tendered,whether there would be a report and so onwas all contained in the answer to yourquestion on notice some time ago.

Mr BEANLAND: Page 18 of the MPSrefers to the Gambling Help-Line. You indicatethat consideration will be given to extendingthe Gambling Help-Line following theindependent analysis. However, in answer toquestion on notice No. 4 you indicated thatfunding will be maintained at current levels.Which of the statements is correct? Are wegoing to have an extension of the GamblingHelp-Line? Is there additional funding for thatto occur? What is the situation? The answersappear to conflict.

Ms BLIGH: I do not think they do. Theanswer to the question on notice indicated thatthere was no intention to cut the program. Theexisting levels will be maintained. Should theevaluation establish that this program is worthextending in its current form, we would seekthrough further budget allocations to extendthe Gambling Help-Line. The independentevaluation has been finalised, but it is currentlywith the responsible gambling advisorycommittee, which is a committee that advisesme as Minister on a range of issues to do withgambling revenue. I have yet to receive theevaluation report so I am unable to commentat this stage on the shape or the nature of itand what it says. I look forward to receiving

that very soon. There is no specific budgetallocation in this budget to expand thatprogram, but it is there in the MPS to allude tothe fact that we are keen to make sure thatthe services are available to as manyQueenslanders as possible.

Mr BEANLAND: A number of pages in theMPS refer to child-care services. Is there anyadditional funding in the budget in relation todealing with unregulated backyard child-careoperators? That is something I am gettingcontinual letters and requests about. Icontinually write to you about this. I am sureyou are getting widespread representationabout this matter. I appreciate that some morework is being done on regulations. If you aregoing to do something in relation to it, it willneed inspectors and so forth. Is there anyadditional funding in the Budget to cope withthis matter? It looks like you have got plenty ofpaper; you should be able to answer it fully.

Ms BLIGH: I have got an answer—withoutthe paper. The question of regulating backyardcare is in the first instance a legislativequestion and not a financial question.Ultimately depending on the legislativeproposals that are finalised and supported bythe Parliament, we will then be in a position tomake determinations about possible costsincurred, although I would also say that we arealso looking as part of the Child Care StrategicPlan at the priorities for the Office of Child Careand the way we do our work in both the Officeof Child Care and out in regions, where child-care resource officers are working with child-care centres, and the priorities that we set fortheir work. As the member alluded, theregulation of backyard care is quite acontentious issue and it is one about which theindustry is concerned from the point of view ofits possible threats to its viability. It is oneabout which the Government is concerned,because of the risk to children in terms ofstandards.

The question of how we regulatebackyard care is not easily answered and therehave been extensive discussions with theindustry itself about how that might occur. Wehave been having discussions with theCommonwealth Government about this. Oneof the reasons for the proliferation of backyardcare is that it is eligible for the Child CareRebate. The only requirement for a family toaccess the Child Care Rebate is that they getcare from a care provider who has a taxnumber and has registered with the Medicareoffice. A number of families can reasonably beexcused for believing that, when theCommonwealth Government is giving them a


rebate for a service—and many families havereported that they did believe this—theseservices had been checked or that the personhad a licence or was somehow registered; thatregistering with the CommonwealthGovernment required some sort of process ofchecking. That is not the case at the momentin Queensland, but I understand that in otherStates, where the State Government has putin place some regulatory standards theCommonwealth would participate by providingthe Child Care Rebate only to those peoplewho meet those standards. Part of the stick inthe equation is that families who are usingbackyard care which was not meeting theregulations would not be eligible for the ChildCare Rebate. That is part of the policing of thenew system.

Mr BEANLAND: I thank you, Minister, andyour departmental staff.

The CHAIRMAN: Finally, I note on page 1of the MPS that reference is made to efforts inrespect of organisational development toimprove service capabilities in the department.Can you briefly outline the details of thisprocess?

Ms BLIGH: Near the end of last year thedepartment started to go through a strategicplanning exercise. Our strategic plan signals anew direction for the department. As part ofthat and as triggered also by the decision tocreate the new Disability Services Agency, thedepartment has gone through a two-phasedorganisational development process. Phase 1focused on program structure in head officeand some of the issues that I have alreadyalluded to, such as centralising our fundingfunction and refining the program areas andmaking them more integrated with each other.We are looking at a Statewide service areathat will look at services that are provided on aStatewide basis. The second phase of theorganisational development process has beenlooking at aligning our resources at a regionallevel and working on a much strongerpartnership with our local government partners.The department will be moving from astructure which has five regions to a structurewith 12 regions and will be starting to workmuch more with people at the local level. Theorganisational development teams were madeup of departmental staff.

I would like to take this opportunity torecognise the work that they have done inputting together these things. I recognise thatthis sort of change is never easy.Departmental officers across the departmenthave embraced most of these changes with agreat deal of excitement and optimism. I would

also like to recognise the vision and work ofthe director-general in this regard. He hasapparently become known on the front line asGandhi in a suit. He asked me not to say that.

The CHAIRMAN: The member for Fitzroywill be devastated.

Ms BLIGH: The member for Fitzroy mighthave copyright and I will have to take it up withhim. Organisational development will put ourdepartment on a much stronger footing toachieve our strategic plan and to achieve thereforms that I have outlined to the Committeeat some length this afternoon.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Minister. Thetime allotted for the consideration of theEstimates of expenditure for the Minister forFamilies, Youth and Community Care andMinister for Disability Services has now expired.I thank the Minister and all of the portfolioofficers for their attendance and the effortsthat they have put in for this hearing. That alsoconcludes the consideration by EstimatesCommittee G of the matters referred to it bythe Parliament on 27 August 1999. I declarethis public hearing closed.

The Committee adjourned at 7.31 p.m.

estimates committee g community care and … food and fibre sciences ... estimates committee g now...

Documents