Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

FRIDAY, 18 OCTOBER 1974

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

1468 Supply (18 OCTOBER 1974] Questions Upon Notice

FRIDAY, 18 OCTOBER 1974

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. W. H. Lonergan, Flinders) read prayers and took the chair at 11 a.m.

PARLIAMENTARY REFRESHMENT ROOMS COMMITTEE

APPOINTMENT OF MR. S. J. MULLER

Mr. SPEAKER: I have to inform the House that a vacancy exists in the Refresh­ment Rooms Committee consequent upon the resignation of Mr. David Alan Low, member for the electoral district of Cooroora.

Hon. J. BJELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah -Premier): I move-

"That Mr. Selwyn John Muller, member for the electoral district of Fassifern, be appointed a member of the Refreshment Rooms Committee to fill the vacancy caused by 'the resignation of Mr. Low." Motion agreed to.

PAPERS

The following paper was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed:-

Report of the Anzac Day Trust for the year 1973-74.

The following paper was laid on the table:-

Report of the Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations for the year 1973-74.

QUESTIONS UPON NOTICE

CORONATION DRIVE, BRISBANE

Mr. Miller, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Mines,-

In view of the wide public concern over any mutilation of Coronation Drive to pro­vide an extra traffic lane. will he assure the House that not only will the Govern­ment refuse any assistance to the Brisbane City Council but it will totally oppose any move to destroy any trees, or the present rights of citizens to footpath access?

Answer:-"The control of works on Coronation

Drive rests wholly with the Brisbane City Council and the Main Roads Department has no authority over such works."

TRU FIT CLOTHING MANUFACTURING COMPANY PTY. LTD.

Mr. Harvey for Mr. Harris, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Justice,-

(!) Is the firm "Tru-Fit" a registered company and, <if so, what is its address and what is its type of merchandise?

Questions Upon Notice [18 OCTOBER 1974] Questions Upon Notice 1469

(2) On what date was the company registered and who are the directors?

(3) Has the company tendered success­fully for the supply of garments or uni­forms to the Queensland Government during the past 12 months and, if so, what departments have already been supplied or will be supplied under such contracts?

( 4) What is >the number and the type of garments supplied to each department?

A.nswers:-

( 1) "It is presumed that the enquiry relates to Tru Fit Clothing Manufacturing Company Pty. Ltd., which carries on business at 161-163 Stanley Street, South Brisbane."

(2) "This company was incorporated on March 20, 1972. According to inform­ation lodged in the Office of the Com­missioner for Corporate Affairs, the direc­lors are John Mervyn Harold Sugars, Hilda Sugars and Douglas Williams."

(3 and 4) "These Questions should be directed to another Minister."

HOUSING COMMISSION ACCOMMODA­TION, BRISBANE AREA AND

WYNNUM ELECTORATE

Mr. Marginson for Mr. Harris, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Works,-

(1) How many Housing Commission houses were completed in the Brisbane area during 1972-73 and 1973-74?

(2) How many applications for hous­ing accommodation were received by the commission during the same years?

(3) How many of these applications have been approved?

( 4) What areas of land are held on behalf of the commission for future build­ing development in the Wynnum electomte?

Answers:-

( 1) "Dwellings provided in Brisbane City and adjacent areas-1972-73, 989; 1973-74, 830."

(2) "For rental houses-1972-73, 4,067; !973-74, 5,238; for aged persons units­!972-73, 716; and 1973-74, 586."

(3) "Allotments are on basis of assessed priority and are not detailed statistically in year of lodgement of application. Exclu­sive of armed services and employer tenancies 3,946 applicants were allotted to rental accommodation in 1972-74."

( 4) "Three building sites acquired last month at Robtrish and Baybreeze Streets and two hectares at Stannard Road."

48

VOLUNTARY-TESTING BREATHALYSER MACHINES

Mr. Hartwig, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Justice,-

( 1) Is he aware that in Canada coin­operated breathalyser machines are situ­ated in premises where alcoholic beverages are consumed?

(2) As it is reported that these machines cost approximately $250, will be consider having this voluntary 'test apparatus intro­duced into Queensland to enable drinkers to ascertain their degree of intoxication before driving, thereby allowing them to make alternative travel arrangements, if necessary, thus assisting in reducing the road toll?

Answers:-(1) "Yes." (2) "Due to the lack of evidence as

to the effectiveness of these machines in helping to reduce the road toll, no serious consideration has been given to the intro• duction of mandatory legislation requiring their installation in licensed premises in Queensland. There would, however, be no objection to their installation on a voluntary basis, subject to the normal pro­visions of the existing legislation pertaining to coin-operated machines. However, I fail to see a seasoned Australian drinker squandering his last few cents of drinking money at the end of the evening to ascer­tain whether he is under the influence or not, and even if he does, his senses prob­ably would be so befuddled he would still form his own judgment in the long run, as to whether he should or should not drive."

SLAUGHTER-HOUSES AND BUTCHER SHOPS

Mr. Hartwig, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

( 1) With reference to a statement in the Queensland Country Life of October 3 attributed to the Director of the Slaughtering and Meat Inspection Branch of the Depar,tment of Primary Industries, when addressing a combined meeting of South-East Graziers A'ssociation at Tiaro on September 27, that there was no inten­tion in the new regulations to bring country slaughter-houses to abattoir standards and that the Act provided for three classes of slaughter-houses according to volume of slaughtering, will he define the classes referred to?

(2) How many registered butcher shops were in operation as at June, 1972 and June, 1974?

(3) How many inspectors were appointed by his department to police the new regulations?

1470 Questions Upon Notice [18 OcTOBER 1974] Questions Upon Notice

( 4) What knowledge of country slaughter-house establishments did ·these 1nspectors have prior to their appointment?

(5) As many country butchers operate at local fat-cattle sales and are a valuable asset to the industry, how many butcher shops have closed during the last two years?

Answers:-

( 1) "Class 1 refers to a throughput of 25 cattle units per day or 100 cattle units per 7 days. Class 2 refers to a through­put of 15 cattle units per day or 50 cattle units per 7 days. Class 3 refens to a throughput of 3 cattle units per day or 10 cattle units per 7 days. Four calves or eight sheep or five swine are also the equivalent of one cattle unit."

(2) "There is no record in the head office of my department of the number of registered butcher shops in operation in Queensland in June 1972. RegiiStrations are undertaken directly by country officers and records are held at each office. There are at present approximately 1,620 butcher shops registered."

(3 and 4) "No additional appointments have been made. However, senior super­VISing district inspectors of the Slaughter­ing and Meat Inspection Branch at Cairns T~wnsville, Rockhampton, Maryborough: Bnsbane and Toowoomba (each with many years of experience of country slaughter­house conditions) have been involved inti­mately with practically all licensees of country slaughter-houses, in relation to administraNon of new standards. Fifteen other inspectors serve in centres where there me country slaughter-houses and all of them are fully experienced men."

(5) "No actual figure is available, but there would have been very few closures in country areas of the State where country butchers operate at local fat stock sales. Main closures have been in Brisbane and some of the larger cities where older shops close by virtue of development of shopping complexes, many of which include a replacement butcher shop in close proxim­ity thereto and consequent loss of trade."

DISPOSAL OF FOOD WASTE AND GARBAGE

Mr. Hartwig, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

( 1) With reference to his Answer to my Question on October 9 that because of an Australian Agricultural Council decision advocated by Senator Wriedt all piggeries depending on swill-feeding would cease before July, 1975, as this will require a daily garbage collection by local auth­orities, have all local authorities been notified of this added responsibility and cost?

(2) How many piggeries dependent on this method of feeding could be affected?

(3) Will country butchers be forced to dispose of their piggeries because of not being allowed to feed scrap meat, fat, bones, etc., to their pigs, even when .the scraps are boiled?

Answers:-

(1) "Not all local authorities have yet been approached in this regard."

(2) "Surveys being carried out at pre­sent show that the number of piggeries on which garbage is fed is much smaller than that on our lists of a few years ago. The total number presently garbage feed­ing will be known when the surveys are completed."

(3) "As this is only a recent decision of Agricultural Council and the suggested date of implementation is July 1, 1975, I have not yet had the opportunity to consider the situation."

ELECTRICITY CHARGES AND TARIFFS

Mr. Harvey, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Local Government,-

( 1) As there have been two 10 per cent. increases in electricity charges and tariffs since May, solely to meet increased gener­ating costs attributed to the increased coal cost caused principally by the import of Central Queensland coal to supplement West Moreton supplies, and as coal is now being supplied from West Moreton in such quantity as to more than meet the Swanbank Power Station demands, will he review and adjust the electricity charges to the original tariff applicable prior to May and ensure that consumers are not required to pay a 20 per cent. excess unnecessarily?

(2) If the Government is not prepared to restore these tariffs to the pre-May level, how can he justify such action?

Answer:-

(1 and 2) "Electricity tariffs in south­eastern Queensland have been increased this year to meet increased costs of coal from West Moreton as well as Central Queensland sources, and to meet the effects of heavy inflation on wages, costs of materials and capital charges. Stockpiles of coal are still being replenished follow­ing the critically low levels reached earlier this year and deliveries of Central Queens­land coal are continuing. Coal shortages were brought about mainly by the effects of the 1972 Box Flat mine disaster and the 1974 Australia Day floods. Electricity tariffs are not unnecessarily high but have been forced up by these circumstances."

Questions Upon Notice [18 OcTOBER 1974] Questions Upon Notice 1471

DRAINAGE, SOMERSET HILLS STATE SCHOOL

Mr. Harvey, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Works,-

As the Somerse·t Hills State School grounds are subjected to a very seriously­polluted open drain which is both a health and an accident hazard to children, when will some remedial action be taken by his department?

Answer:-

"The first stage of this stormwater drainage system has been approved and an or~er was placed on the Brisbane City Council on June 4, 1974, for the carrying out of the work. The compleNon of the scheme will be considered later in the financial year in relation to funds then available for works of this nature."

TRAFFIC LIGHTS FOR PEDESTRIAN CROSSING, GYMPIE RoAD, KEDRON

Mr. Harvey, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Mines,-

As Gympie Road, Kedron, is carrying an ever-increasing volume of vehicular tr~ffic both at peak and off-peak periods, Will he ensure the safety of all pedestrians who cross the roadway between Sadlier and Somerset Roads by the urgent con­struction of a pedestrian-activated traffic light at this crossing?

Answer:-

"If a crossing is built it would be part of the signalisation of the Somerset Road intersection. Traffic and pedestrian counts do not allow priority to be given to this intersection. I have asked the Main Roads Department to make a further check on their figures to see if the priority should be reviewed."

DEER FARMING AND VENISON MARKETING

Mr. Aiken, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

( 1) Has deer farming been investigated as a commercial possibility and is the pro­duction of venison per acre comparable with be.ef and ~am? production, with high conversiOn effiCJencies from feed to meat?

(2) What markets are available for venison and are prices and demand suf­ficient to warrant excursions into venison production?

Answers:-

( 1) "Deer farming is being investigated in Victoria and an officer of my depart­ment will have an opportunity of studying developments while attending a conference on deer to be held in that State next month. To my knowledge there are no

Australian figures available comparing pro­duction per acre of venison with beef and lamb."

(2) "The market for venison is special­ised and limited and is not sufficient to warrant large scale excursions into deer farming in this State. My officers are studying deer in the wild and one recom­mendation from this work may well favour the harvesting of limited quantities of wild venison under rigid controls. In view of the effect that the Federa,J Labm Govern­ment's rural policies have had on the economics of the beef industry, I might add that I do not think anybody would be very inclined to go to any great expense in the growing of deer."

CoNVERSION OF ANIMAL MANURE TO PROTEIN

Mr. Aiken, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

·what is the recovery rate by conversion of animal manure back to protein and is a profitable result possible?

Answer:-

"! presume the Honourable Member's Question refers to conversion of animal wastes into food protein. The proportion of protein that can be recovered from animal wastes in this way depends on the composition of the waste, its source and the method used to re-cycle it. The procedures are still largely in the develop­mental stages and have not been subjected to full economic assessment and at this juncture, it is not possible to say from the information available to me, whether it is profitable in our situation."

SIROTHERM FOR WATER PURIFICATION

Mr. Aiken, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Conservation,-

( 1) Has a viable solution to salinity been found in Sirotherm or any other pro­duct and is it an economic possibility to convert sea water to drinking water or industrial water?

(2) Is Sirotherm or any other product capable of handling industrial water waste at an economic level which would allow recycling to drinking water and also pro­vide protection from waste which at pre­sent can pollute the environment?

Answers:-

( I) "As indicated in my Answer to the Member for Port Curtis on March 14, 1974, 'Sirotherm' is a process which has been developed by the C.S.l.R.O. 'to soften or treat brackish water. It is in the early stages of development and its results are being watched with interest.

1472 Questions Upon Notice [18 OcTOBER 1974] Questions Upon Notice

It is not yet possible to say whether or not the process. has any application to the conversion of sea water to drinking or industrial water on a long-term economical basis."

(2) "At this stage it is understood that neither 'Sirotherm' nor any other process is capable of recycling water to drinking water standards at co1>ts comparable with those usually accepted for the conventional storage of natural waters."

COMMONWEALTH FREEZING OF TOWNSVILLE LAND AT 1972

VALUATION Mr. Newbery, pursuant to notice, asked

The Premier,-In view of the criticism by some Mem­

bers that Queensland has refused to co-operate with the Commonwealth in the development of Townsville, does the development by the Commonwealth Gov­ernment require the freezing of vast areas of land adjoining Townsville at the 1972 valu~tion, the land to be acquired, when ,reqUired, ~ver a period of 30 years, at that valuatton?

Answer:-

"I would firstly assure the Honourable Member that there has been no refusal by my Government to co-operate with the Commonwealth in the development of Townsville or any other part of the State. On the contrary, we are quite prepared to enter into an acceptable arrangement with the Commonwealth for development of urban areas, but there are certain aspects of a scheme submitted by the Common­wealth which are quite unacceptable to my Government and which we are certain are unacceptable to the majority of Queens­Ianders. The main objection is the form of restricted freehold proposed by the Commonwealth, which would mean that any enhancement in the value of land as a result of future redevelopment and the like would be reserved to the Crown and not to the owner. This concept is c~ntrary to accepted land tenure prin­ciples m Queensland. However, negotia­'tions are still proceeding with the Com­monwealth Government and I am hopeful that these can be finalised at an early date to the mutual satisfaction of both the Commonwealth and this State. It is true <that originally the Commonwealth did require as one of its conditions upon the lending of finance to the State, that the State impose upon the people a pr:ce stabilization formula which, in fact, amounted to the freezing of land prices as at a certain date. However, the Com­monwealth has now agreed not to inter­fere with the existing law and practice of the State in this regard and that par­ticular obstacle to co-operation between the Governments has been removed."

INFECTIVE HEPATITIS Mr. Marginson for Mr. Hanson, pursuant

to notice, asked the Minister for Health,-( 1) How many cases of infectiom,

hepatitis have been reported since January 1, 1970?

(2) In what districts has there been a prevalence of this infection and are statis­tics available? If so, what are the age groups and 'how many deaths have occurred?

Answers:-( 1) "The number of notified cases ol

infective hepatitis since January 1, 1970 to September 30, 1974, was 4,155."

(2) "Statistics for specified districts are not recmded but the number of notifica­tions in age groups in metropolitan and country areas for the three financial years 1971-72, 1972-73 and 1973-74 were:-

Age Group Metro-politan

Country Total

04 .. .. 19 125 144 5-14 .. .. 216 849 1,065

15-24 .. .. 211 555 766 25-34 .. .. 140 542 682 35-49 76 291 367 50 years ,;,;d ov~r 53 !58 211 Not stated .. 15 46 61

Total .. .. 730 2,566 3.296

Deaths for the calendar years 1971 to 1973 were as follows:-1971, 11; 1972. 6; and 1973, 6."

FINANCIAL AsSISTANCE FOR MARY­BOROUGH SPORTING BODIES

Mr. Alison, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Tourism,-

(1) What amount of State Governmem subsidies, grants and guaranteed loans wa~ approved and/or paid to Maryborough sporting bodies in the 15 months to Sep­tember 30?

(2) In what way do he and his depart­ment co-operate with the Commonwealth Department of Sport in relation to Com­monwealth subsidies for sporting bodies'?

Answers:-(1) "Subsidies, $12,342; and grants,

$500. One loan for $30,000 was approved! for a Government guarantee under the Sporting Bodies' Loans Guarantee Ac1 1973."

(2) "In every way possible."

STAFF, GYMPIE PoLICE STATION Mr. Alison, pursuant to notice, asked The

Minister for Works,-What increase in staff at the Gympie

Police Station will be involved as a result of the decision to have the newly-appointed Inspector for the North Coast Region sej up his office at Gympie?

Questions Upon Notice [18 OCTOBER 1974] Questions Upon Notice 1473

A!lswer:-

''None. The Regional Superintendent will utilise the services of existing staff at Gympie Police Station as required."

HOUSING COMMISSION LAND, EVERTON ELECTORATE

Mr. N. F. Jones, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Works,-

( 1) What is the total area of land held by the Queensland Housing Commission within the Everton Electorate?

(2) How many blocks will result from the development of the land held?

(3) Of the total, how many blocks have been surveyed?

( 4) What is the street location of blocks ready for the erection of dwellings or pensioners' units?

Answer:-

( l to 4) "One building site in Kirwan Street, Gravely, which has not been con­sidered suitable for house construction. Also an area of approximately four-fifths of a hectare off Corrigan Street, Grovely, which would be suitable for development for aged persons units."

RESIDENTIAL LAND VALUATION, BRISBANE AND GOLD COAST

Mr. N. F • .Jones, pursuant to notice, asked The Premier,-

( 1) How many residential blocks of land were recorded with the Valuer-General's Department in the September quarter of 1974?

(2) What was the average value for (a) Brisbane and (b) the Gold Coast?

Answer:-(1 and 2) "I am sorry but I cannot

follow the import of the Honourable Member's Question. If he can clarify his request I will endeavour to supply what­ever information it is that he is actually seeking."

MINING LEASES, GoODGER

Mr. N. F . .Jones, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Mines,-

( 1) With regard to applications for three mining leases and a feasibility study carried out at Goodger, what is the number, the description and the locality of each lease?

(2) Which company, person or persons held the leases prior to the above applica­tion being lodged?

(3) Who carried out the feasibility study of kaolin mining which was com­menced in 1970, and are details of the study available?

Answers:-( 1) "The three closest mining leases

to Goodger are Mining Lease Applica­tions Nos. 192, 193 and 194, Nanango Mining District. J. M. Huber Corporation is the applicant for these leases. No. 192 is situated within portions 21, 22, 25, 40 and 182, parish of Taabinga. No. 193 is situated within portion 144 and sub­division 4 of portion 153, parish of Kunioon. No. 194 is situated within portions 83v and 84v, parish of Boonenne, and portions 4 and 30, parish of Taabinga. The areas covered by these mining lease applications have been noted on charts at the Mines Department and are available for inspection."

(2) "At the time of lodgment of M.L. Applications Nos. 192, 193 and 194, the areas covered by these lease applications were not subject to any tenure under the Mining Act. These mining lease applica­tions had been within the area held by J. M. Huber Corporation as authority to prospect No. 642 M which expired on December 31, 1973."

(3) "A feasibility study was carried out by J. M. Huber Corporation on kaolin deposits of economic interest within the authority to prospect. This material is confidential."

EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES LEGISLATION

Mr. Leese, pursuant to notice, asked The Premier,-

( 1) Is an inter-departmental committee reviewing the administrative procedure and the legislation relating to extractive indus­tries and, if so, when did the study commence?

(2) When will it be completed?

(3) Will amending legislation be forth­coming during this Session of Parliament?

Answers:-( 1) "Two reports, one dealing with

extractive material in the City of Brisbane and its environs, and the other wic!h administrative procedures relating to the extractive industry were recently presented to Cabinet and are now being examined conjointly by a small inter-departmental committee."

(2) "This committee commenced its review of the reports earlier this month and anticipates it will report back to Cabinet by December."

(3) "No."

1474 Questions Upon Notice [18 OCTOBER 1974] Questions Upon Notice

MEDIA SERVICES BRANCH, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

Mr. Leese, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Education,-

( 1) Are a number of teachers attached to the Education Department Media Ser­vices Branch being used for duties norm­ally carried out by clerks and general assistants at Red Comb House?

(2) Has colour TV equipment worth over $200,000 been in operation at the Ashgrove Film Centre since November, 1973, and is it being used as a plaything by those teachers and not being operated by professional technicians to produce material for general distribution?

(3) Are the resultant video tapes being used in schools for educational purposes or will they ever be used, and how many tapes have been cut to date?

Answers:-(1) "No. In the audio visual section

there are five seconded teachers. These are being used on inservice education in educational 'technology and the prepara­tion of advisory materials for schools. In the TV and radio section there are six seconded teachers. Two are used on liaison work in schools. Three are used in a pro­fessional capacity on production work. One is used in the editing of teachers' notes associ3Jted with radio and TV broad­casts."

(2) "Yes, the TV equipment is in use. However, it cost only about half the amount stated by the Honourable Member. It is not a 'plaything' for staff but is a valuable and productive educa­tional asset. After the initial training period for the staff concerned the studio has been in full production. The Hon­ourable Member might be interested to know that from January to October this year 227 radio and TV educational pro­ductions have been prepared and released for use in schools."

(3) "I table for the information of Honourable Members a schedule of radio and TV educational productions either completed or being completed since January this year. Furthermore, I invite the Hon­ourable Member to visit the centre to judge for himself the quality and extent of its production." Paper.-Whereupon Sir Alan Fletcher !arid

upon the Table of the House the schedule referred to.

PoLICE STATIONS, ARANA HILLS AND

BRACKENR!DGE

Mr. Leese, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Works,-

As many areas of the Pine Rivers Elec­torate are still not receiving adequate police coverage, will he urgently consider the pro­vision of police stations at Arana Hills and Brackenridge?

Answer:-"It is considered that adequate police

attention is being given to the Pine Rivers area generally and there is no requirement at this stage for provision of police stations at the places mentioned by the Honourable Member."

GoLD COAST CITY COUNCIL OFFICES IN NATIONAL HOUSE, SOUTHPORT

Mr. Houston, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Local Government,-

(1) Is the Gold ·Coast City Council rent­ing offices in the National Party Head­quarters Building, which is owned by the National Party?

(2) Was an aprangement made between the Gold Coast City Council and Cam­bridge Credit for the renting of this office space?

Answers:-( 1) "I understand that the Health

Inspection section of the Gold Coast Oity Council is presently occupying rented accommodation in National House, South­port."

(2) "I have no information on this matter."

SUGAR SALES AGREEMENT WITH JAPAN

Mr. Row, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

In view of recent publicity given to Commonwealth Government statements accusing Japanese authorities of acting irresponsibly towards the Australian meat and wool trade, will he take all possible action to ensure that Queensland sugar sales to that country are not exposed to the same disastrous political interference by Commonwealth Labor politicians, by maintaining the present sugar sales arrangements which are conducted by the Queensland Sugar Board and its agencies?

Answer:-"I am aware of course of reports of

differences of opinion between the Com­monwealth Government and Japanese authorities in relation to Australian meat and wool trade with Japan. Let me assure the Honourable Member for Hinchinbrook that the Queensland Government as legal owner of all the raw sugar produced in Australia, would certainly not countenance any degree of political interference in the export marketing of raw sugar. Indeed successive Queensland Governments have taken the view that they aot as stewards for the industry and that accordingly they have a heavy responsibility to ensure that sugar is marketed in a manner which best meets the needs of the sugar industry, and the community as a whole. I recently

Questions Upon Notice (18 OCTOBER 1974] Questions Upon Notice 1475

had the opportunity to have discussions with senior representatives of the Japanese commercial buyers of Australian raw sugar who visited Queensland for talks with the Sugar Board and the Government',s mar­keting agents. C.S.R. Let me assure the Honourable Member that the relationship between the Sugar Board and C.S.R. and the Japanese commercial sugar interests has not been exposed to political inter­ference. I would add that there has been close consultation as appropriate with the Commonwealth Government in relation to the sugar industry's long-term interests in the Japanese market."

TRADE UNION BAN ON IMPORTED MOTOR VEHICLES

Mr. Row, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Development,-

( 1) Is the union ban on imported motor vehicles in direct conflict with Commonwealth Labor policies towards multinational corporations, of which the Australian motor-manufacturing industry entirely consists?

(2) Will this action result in sudden unemployment in the motor trade in Queensland?

Answers:-( I) "Far be it from me to act as inter­

preter of Federal Labor policy which seems to change dramatically from day to day."

(2) "There is no doubt that if a com­plete ban on imported vehicles is applied, this will have a very serious effect on those employed in the retail and servicing sectors of the motor vehicle industry."

STATE HIGH SCHOOL, THURSDAY IsLAND

Mr. Wallis-Smith, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Works,-

( 1) Have any plans been drawn for the provision of permanent buildings at the Thursday Island High School at the present site?

(2) When will the existing temporary classrooms be removed?

(3) Has any thought been given to the provision of a two-storey building for classrooms?

( 4) Will he consider arranging a visit by an officer to report on the permanent needs at the school?

Answer: ( 1 to 4) "The existing accommodation

at this high school is adequate and having regard to funds available there is no requirement to plan, at this stage, for permanent structures to replace the tem­porary accommodation. At the appropriate

time, if such is necessary, my departmental planning officers will make a further inspection of the site."

HOUSING FOR ABORIGINES, LAURA AND COEN

Mr. Wallis-Smith, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Conservation,-

( 1) Have all houses for Aborigines at Laura and Coen been completed and are they occupied?

(2) Was each house furnished and, if so, was all furniture second-hand?

(3) How many houses are occupied in each locality and what rents are being charged?

( 4) May residents purchase their houses and, if so, what is the price of (a) the house and (b) the land?

(5) What water supply has been pro­vided in each case?

( 6) Has his department any plans for a town water supply for Coen and, if so, when is work on water storage expected to begin?

Answers:-( 1) "Twelve homes have been com­

pleted and occupied at Coen of a total of 19 programmed. The Laura units are not yet ready for occupation."

(2) "Occupiers are encouraged to pro­vide their own furniture but where this is not possible, the department provides for minimum basic needs with new and/or good quality second-hand furniture."

( 3) "See Answer to Question (1). Rentals are assessed on the ability of the individual tenant to pay and I feel it undesirable to publicise the identifiable personal affairs of departmental clients. However, I can assure the Honourable Member that none of the homes occupied attract a full economic rental."

( 4) "All departmental homes are avail­able for purchase on similar ·terms and conditions as apply in Queensland Housing Commission Commonwealth/State housing arrangements. The department has not yet been successful in having the Com­monwealth agree to more realistic terms for its clients. The purchase price, house and land, is assessed on an individual unit basis and would be negotiated with each client. For average costs in relation to Coen homes, the Honourable Member is referred to Answer to his Question of March 15, 1973."

(5) "At Laura, the Irrigation and Water Supply Commission is proceeding with the establ<ishment of a bore water supply to provide a reticulated water service. This

1476 Questions Upon Notice [18 OcTOBER 1974] Questions Without Notice

is not yet complete. As the Honourable Member will recall, the Coen water supply is a matter for the Department of Local Government and he is referred to Answer to his Question on this matter of March 15, 1973."

(6) "See Answer to Question (5)."

OWNERSHIP OF HOUSES AND LAND BY ABORIGINES AND ISLANDERS

Mr. Wallis-Smith, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Conservation,-

( 1) May Aborigines and Islanders on communities or islands buy the houses in which .they live?

(2) If so, will they be given title to the land on which their houses are built when they have made the final payment?

( 3) If not, will he consider allowing the recognition of their land rights by pro­viding for their ownership of house.s and land?

Answers:­(!) "Yes."

(2) "Yes, having due regard to the nature of the special purposes for which the land has been dedicated which may require the inclusion of appropriate coven­ants as determined in consultation with the advisory councils."

(3) "See Answer to Question (2)."

DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CHuRCH SCHOOLS

Mr. Frawley, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Education,-

(!) With reference to an adve11tisement in The Courier-Mail of October 12 under the heading of "Teaching Appointments" which stated that under a grant obtained from the Australian Schools Commission the Council for Democracy in Schools is establishing a learning exchange by J anu­ary, 1975, and is calling applications for a learning exchange co-ordinator, is this another attempt by D~r. D'Urso and his malcontents to further undermine discipline in schools by using this grant of Common­wealth money?

(2) In view of the Commonwealth Government's decision to reduce the edu­cation claim from $400 to $150 for taxa­tion purposes, thereby hitting at the pocket of the family man, is the Commonwealth Government doing all in its power to undermine and eventually destroy all church schools and could this grant be better spent in furthering, and not hinder­ing, education?

Answers:-( 1) "I am aware of the advertisement

referred to, but as ·to the manner in which the grant is to be employed-this has not

been confided to me. If the activities to date of Dr. D'Urso and the Council for Democracy in Schools are any guide then obviously nothing advantageous to the welfare of our schools and our students is likely to result from this grant. They are far more likely to contribute to the difficulties of our teachers in maintaining discipline in our schools."

(2) "I consider that the action taken by the Commonwealth Government to reduce the amount of the education allow­ance is most unfortunate for those who, for no fault of their own, are obliged to send their children away ·to boarding schools. This change in the allowance will fall most heavily on country people who in a very large number of cases have no alternative but to use boarding schools. I would be unwilling to suggest that the Commonwealth Government would deliberately take any action to undermine and eventually destroy all church schools, but I would consider any available money could be more wisely allocated than by making a grant to the Council for Demo­cracy in Schools."

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

Mr. TUCKER: I ask the Premier: With reference to the proposal to hold the next session of the Australian Constitutional Con­vention in Adelaide during the period 4 to 8 November 1974, can he give an assurance that Queensland will in fact be properly rep­resented at that convention and, if not, is it not unethical to allow so much time and money to be spent on preparing for the session, which could be abrogated by lack of a Queensland presence?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: I know that tht> honourable member is trying to find out when the election is to be held. Firstly, for the information of the Leader of the Opposi­tion, a week or so ago I was informed that the Commonwealth would not be represented and that the convention was a waste of time. Whether the Commonwealth will be rep­resented or not, I do not know. Secondly, I do not know whether the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues will be attend­ing. I would like to know from him whether or not he will be there. The answer to the question is that the position will be watched and followed very closely.

Mr. Tucker: Thank you for nothing.

INTERSTATE COMPONENT SHORTAGES

Mr. TUCKER: I ask the Premier: As southern States apparently create inexplicable shortages of goods essential to Queensland industry-for example, motor vehicle parts­what steps are taken to survey the situation with a view to action being taken towards ensuring an adequate supply of production material?

Questions Without Notice [18 OCTOBER 1974] Questions Without Notice 1477

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: In the first instance, the Leader of the Opposition should direct his question to his Federal colleague:> who are causing all of the shortages. Every body knows where the trouble stems from. His colleagues in the trade unions are adding to the problem by promoting industrial tur­moil. It is unbelievable that Australia should find itself in its present situation. This nation should be prosperous, its economy should be growing stronger and Australians should be happy with full employment. Unfortunately, because of the Federal Gov­ernment's policies and the action of militant union leaders, we are in this unfortunate position.

CLAIM BY IPSWICH CITY COUNCIL FOR FLOOD-DAMAGE RESTORATION

Dr. EDW ARDS: I ask the Treasurer: Has he seen the statement in "The Queensland Times" that the council had applied for an extension of time for the completion of restoration of damage caused by the January 197 4 floods and could he advise the pre­sent position in relation to reimbursement to this council for flood restoration works?

Sir GORDON CHALK: Being a very loyal subscriber to "The Queensland Times" for the last 40 years and from reading that journal daily and also noting the attempt that was made by the Mayor of Ipswich to decry the answer given by the Premier to a question asked in this House two days ago, I anticipated that a question would be asked this morning from one side of the House or the other. It has come from my own side. I appreciate its being asked and I have a prepared answer to it. I have seen the statement and I was expecting the question.

The council did ask for an extension of time beyond the originally stipulated date of 31 December 1974 and it was granted an extension to 31 March 1975. A request for a further extension was made in June 1974. By letter of 24 July the council was advised by the Under Treasurer that it must proceed on the assumption that all claims must be finalised by 31 March but that, if unfore­seen circumstances arose to prevent this, con­sideration would be given to a further exten­sion to 31 May 1975. No reply has been received to the Under Treasurer's letter of 24 July and no request has been made since that date for an extension beyond 31 March, 1975.

For the information of the honourable member and as an indication that the council apparently had no intention of getting on with the work quickly, I draw attention to the fact that the first application for an extension of time was made by the council as far back as 24 May 1974. Further evidence of the dilly-dallying ways of the council is revealed by the fact that in the nine months since the flood and in full

knowledge of the time limitation, the council has claimed reimbursement of cost of work to the value of only $822,344, which is only a very small portion of the approved grants totalling $3,437,415. Payments of $1,272,813, including advances ahead of require­ments-! emphasise "ahead of require­ments"-have been made to the council and further payments are being processed.

FIRE PREVENTION WEEK

Mr. BROMLEY: I ask the Minister for Development and Industrial Affairs: What associations are organising Fire Prevention Week commencing on 21 October? Will his department be co-operating and, if so, in what way?

Mr. CAMPBELL: I think the honourable member is fully aware that this is an annual event organised by the Queensland Fire Protection Society for the purpose of high­lighting the importance of fire protection and fire safety. Considerable publicity is given to it, and there is very wide participa­tion by those interested in this very important community service.

INTRODUCTION OF NILE PERCH TO QUEENSLAND WATERS

Mr. BIRD: I ask the Minister for Primary Industries: What progress has been made with the proposal to introduce Nile perch into Queensland rivers and streams?

Mr. SULLIVAN: I am becoming a little impatient with the Australian Fisheries Council at its lack of decision in this matter. The Nile perch is a very good eating and sporting fish, and we believe that it would be very suitable for the waters of the Burdekin above the Clare weir, Lake Tinaroo, and the waters behind other dams. This matter was raised at the meeting of the Australian Fisheries Council held, I think, towards the end of September, and the advisory council was instructed to consider the matter and to report back urgently to the Australian Fisheries Council. We are very keen to have Nile perch introduced to waters such as those that I have mentioned.

SUBMISSION TO COMMONWEALTH GOVERN­MENT ON QUEENSLAND'S HoSPITAL NEEDS

Mr. AHERN: I ask the Minister for Health: Has his attention been drawn to Press reports and radio comment over the last couple of days on a request by the Federal Minister for Health (Dr. Everingham) for a detailed submission from Queensland setting out the State's future hospital needs? Will the Minister make his submission to the Federal department without delay?

Mr. T001H: I have noticed and read these statements or requests from Dr. Ever­ingham. I must confess that I did so with an extraordinary degree of surprise because as recently as December last-less than 10 months ago--a detailed submission of that

1478 Questions Without Notice [18 OCTOBER 1974] Questions Without Notice

nature, accompanied by voluminous documen­tation, was provided to the Hospitals and Health Commission, or the Sax Commission as it is colloquially known. In April of this year it was updated in >terms of the infla­tionary movements that had taken place so that there should be no misunderstanding as to what we proposed and what it would cost. It was further updated, with a considerable amount of v_oluminous attachment, in Sep­tember of this year. So within 10 months three documents have been provided for Dr. Everingham's department.

Sir Gordon Chalk: He has not been in his office during that period.

Mr. TOOTH: That may be the reason but it does. indicate the extraordinary conf~sion that exists at the present time within Com­monwealth administration. The plain fact of the matter is that they just do not know what. t?ey are about. They are inadvertently P.ractlSlng the old theory of not letting their nght hand know what their left hand is up to. Indeed, the right hand does not know because the left hand has nothing to show.

Opposition Members interjected.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! I ask the honour­able member for South Brisbane and the honourable member for Belmont to cease interjecting. If they continue I will deal with them. '

. ~r .. TOOTH: I. am becoming thoroughly disillusiOned and disgusted with the activities of Federal officers at all levels. We are getting communications from relatively junior officers to relatively junior officers in my department, not merely making requests but almost giving instructions. The position has reached the stage where I have felt it necessary to issue an instruction that officers of my department are not to reply on com­munications but that they are to be referred to the head of the department for action. And the head of the department has regis­tered a protest with the head of Dr. Evering­ham's department regarding this practice.

REDCLIFFE TROTTING CLUB

Mr. K. J. HOOPER: I ask the Treasurer: Is there any truth in the Press reports that the Redcliffe Trotting Club will be allowed to conduct meetings on Friday nights?

Sir GORDON CHALK: I will give a simple answer. There is no truth in the reports.

STATEMENT BY SENATOR CAVANAGH ON GEORGE STEVENS PTY. LTD.

Mr. PORTER: In directing a question to the Premier I draw his attention to a report in yesterday's "Courier-Mail" of a reply given by Senator Cavanagh to Senator McAuliffe, as follows:-

"! know very little about George Stevens Pty. Ltd. I know more about the Marxist policies of the Australian Labor Party and

I make no apology if it puts out of busi­ness those who pay the advertising debts of the Country Party in Queensland."

I now ask the Premier: Will he comment, firstly, on the allegation of debt payments by the company mentioned and, secondly, on the extraordinary but unequivocal affirma­tion by Senator Cavanagh, an A.L.P. Cabinet Minister, that the Australian Labor Party is pursuing Marxist policies?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: I thank the honourable member for his question because it again affords me an opportuDJity of acquainting this House, and members of the public generally, with the attitude and policy of the Labor Party, both of which are directed towards following Marxism, Communism and socialism. If sociaLism is as good as they think it is, if the Communistic policy is as good as they think it is, I ask honourable members opposite why we have so much unemployment and chaos in industry. That is the question we will be putting to the people of Queensland during the forthcoming election campaign.

Mr. Newton interjected.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! This is my final warning. If the honourable member for Bel­mont continues to interject, he will be dealt with .

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: The honour­able member's question again confirms the attitude adopted by this A.L.P. senator, honoumble members opposite, and all other A.L.P. members. They cannot deny it; they cannot get out of it and they can be sure that we will emphasise this whenever the opportunity presents itself. Secondly, it emphasises how antagonistic the A.L.P. is to private enterprise. When an A.L.P. sena­tor can say, as Senator Cavanagh did, that if a private company is silly enough to do so-and-so it is all to the good that certain things should happen to it, he displays the intense hatred that the A.L.P. has for private enterprise and a society that has brought this nation to where it is today. Like most statements made by the senator, the one he made on this occasion is not correct. It is very wide of the mark. On all the informa­tion at my disposal, no National Party or Country Party branch-again, he was wrong in referring to the party as the Country Party; he is right behind the times as he is in relation to Aborigines and many other things-owes these people any money, nor does the organisation as a whole owe Stevens any money. I make that denial on the infor­mation I have, after due consideration. It is dreadful to think that, today, the A.L.P. should come out into the open and without shame, make vows of allegiance to Communism.

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

Brands Act and, &c., Bill [18 OcTOBER 1974] Superannuation &c., Bill (No. 2) 1479

SUPERANNUATION ACTS AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2)

INITIATION

Hon. J. BJELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah­Premier): I move-

"That the House will, at its present sitting, resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider introducing a Bill to amend the State Service Superannua­tion Act 1972-1974 and the Public Service Superannuation Act 1958-1974, each in certain particulars."

Motion agreed to.

GOVERNMENT LOAN BILL

INITIATION

Hon. Sir GORDON CHALK (Lockyer­Treasurer): I move-

"That the House will, at its present sitting, resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider introducing a Bill to authorise the making of arrangements by the State of Queensland pursuant to ,the provisions of the Commonwealth and States Financial Agreement Acts 1927 to 1944 for the raising of certain sums of money by way of loan by the State, and for other purposes."

Motion agreed to.

LAND ACT AMENDMENT AND PASTORALISTS' ASSISTANCE BILL

INITIATION

Hon. W. A. R. RAE (Gregory-Minister for Lands and Forestry): I move-

"That the House will, at its present sitting, resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider introducing a Bill to amend the Land Act 1962-1974 in certain particulars and to provide assist­ance to lessees of certain holdings on account of losses suffered through flooding."

Motion agreed to.

BRANDS ACT AND ANOTHER ACT AMENDMENT BILL

INITIATION

Hon. V. B. SULUVAN (Condamine­Minister for Primary Industries): I move-

"That the House will, at its present sitting, r,esolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider introducing a Bill to amend the Brands Act 1915-1973 and the Stock Act 1915-1973 each in certain particulars."

Motion agreed to.

SUPERANNUATION ACTS AMENDMENT BILL (No. 2)

INITIATION IN COMMITTEE

(The Chairman of Committees, Mr. Lickiss, Mt. Coot-tha, in the chair)

Hon. .J. BJELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah -Premier) (12.5 p.m.): I move-

"That a Bill be introduced to amend the State Service Superannuation Act 1972-1974 and the Public Service Superannua­tion Act 1958-1974, each in certain par­ticulars."

It has been the policy of my Government over the years to fully recognise the value of the Public Service and to improve con­ditions for public servants. We have increased salaries and allowances and also amended the Public Service Superannuation Scheme. Today this scheme is one of the best in the Commonwealth.

As mentioned in the Budget last month, the Government announced plans for amend­ments to the superannuation scheme which will be beneficial to public servants. The purpose of this Bill is to provide further improvements to the State Service Super­annuation Scheme. The main improvements to the scheme are-

(1) that under the old unit scheme there be a substantial lift in the benefits pay­able to contributors who elect to retire between the ages of 60 and 65;

(2) that under the new percentage scheme provision will be made for the recognition of past Crown service in certain cases;

(3) that provision also be made under the percentage scheme for an appreciable reduction in the additional rate of con­tribution whereby an officer may buy back years of service.

The remaining adjustments are consequent upon the main improvements already outlined plus some minor amendments to the two superannuation Acts which have been found necessary during the daily administration of the scheme.

I will now review, in some detail, the major amendments proposed in the Bill. The interest of public servants in retirement earlier than presently prescribed is increas­in<> and people are seeking to have more le~ure time at as early an age as possible. It is for this reason that it is proposed that the benefits payable under the unit scheme be substantially increased in the event of early retirement.

In order to give effect to this, it is pro­posed that the benefits payable for annuity under the old unit scheme be brought more

1480 Superannuation Acts (18 OCTOBER 1974] Amendment Bill (No. 2)

into line with the new percentage scheme entitlement. The entitlement on early retirement will be-

70 per cent at age 60; 76 per cent at a:ge 61; 82 per cent at age 62; 88 per cent at age 63; 94 per cent at age 64;

and of course lOO per cent at age 65. This is an improvement in benefits avail­

able to all those officers who are presently contributing for units under the unit scheme.

A beneficial improvement in the percentage scheme is the recognition of all continuous service with the Crown. This will apply to quite a number of officers who delayed entry to the Superannuation Fund until late in their careers. In the case of continuing con­tributors, that is, persons who commenced contributing under the unit scheme, it means that all service with the Crown will be accepted for the purposes of calculating pension under the percentage scheme. At present, service based on period of memb~r­ship of the fund is used to assess the benefit entitlement.

A further service concession is that relating to the service of an officer whose employment was interrupted by employment with an allied organisation or association. ft is proposed that the total Crown service of such an officer will be allowed. This means his service will be the aggregate of both periods of time excluding that part broken by his external employment.

It has been argued that new entrants who enter the service after age 20 should be able to buy back years of service at a somewhat reduced rate to that presently applying. The amendment set forth in the Bill proposes that any person who joined the fund after 1 January 1973, or joins after the com­mencement of this Act, be accorded the concession of being able to buy back years of service at an additional rate one-third of that presently in force.

The other items of which I have not made specific mention and the schedules I and Il are complementary to the major amendments already examined as well as a number of mis­cellaneous variations found necessary through the practical application of the provisions of the two Acts.

It is considered that the adoption of the amendments as presented will improve the relevant superannuation schemes, including the benefits available to contributors. I am sure that the amendments will be very well accepted by the Public Service, and I commend the Bill to the Committee.

Mr. TUCKER (Townsville West----'Leader of the Opposition) (12.11 p.m.): I indicate at the outset that the Opposition will certainly raise no objection to the amendments. How­ever, I make the observation that not very long ago amendments to the Police Super­annuation Scheme were brought down in

this chamber, and it was said at that time that the purpose was to bring the Police Superannuation Scheme into line with the Public Service scheme. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition welcomed that Bill and acknowledged it as good legislation. Now another amendment is being made to the State Service Superannuation Scheme, and, if we are to be fair and equitable, I take it that we can expect a further amendment to the Police Superannuation Scheme.

The point that I make is that there seems to be a piecemeal approach to superannuation schemes. There is a scheme covering one part of the Public Service, and another scheme covering another part of it. The Police Force is surely part of the Public Service. There is yet another scheme covering local authorities.

Mr. Bjelke-Petersen: Police retire at 60. There is no comparison with the Public Ser­vice scheme.

Mr. TUCKER: That is probably correct, to a point. Can they not retire earlier? Are they to be held to retirement at 60? If so, perhaps they should be given an opportunity to opt out at an earlier age. Although I do not press that point very strongly, it seems to me that there is a need for one superannuation scheme cov­ering all State employees. Perhaps the day will come when consideration will be given to such a scheme in preference to a null).be·r of schemes covering only sections of the community.

Mr. Bje!ke-Petersen: The police have always wanted their own scheme.

Mr. TUCKER: Perhaps that is so, to a degree. Nevertheless, I think it would be a good idea to consider an over-all scheme, although I am not pressing that point strongly today. Others are looking at superannuation on a broader basis and giving thought to a scheme to cover all the people of Australia. However, I do not propose to canvass that, either, at this stage.

The Premier has paid a tribute to the public servants of this State. On behalf of the Opposition, I, too, say that Queens­land public servants are the equal of those in other services, and better than most. They are efficient and dedicated, and I am proud to be able to say that I was a member of the State Public Service. I am still a member of the State Service Union. My colleagues and I have always received the best of attention from members of the State Public Service.

The Premier has said that they are very efficient people, and paid a tribute to them. Might I ask him to recognise them not just as public servants working on behalf of the State but also as citizens of the State, and responsible people, and allow them to make public utterances on occasions, which is something they may not do now? I should like to see them being allowed to make

Superannuation Acts [18 OcTOBER 1974] Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1481

public comment. After all, they have demon­otrated very clearly indeed that they are responsible people, and the Premier has acknowledged that.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! I remind the honourable gentleman that we are dealing with a superannuation Bill, not the con­ditions of service in the Public Service.

Mr. TUCKER: That may be, but I have not seen the Bill. With due respect, Mr. Lickiss, niether have you. As the Premier made some comment on this, surely I am allowed to make my comment on it. I think that is fair and equitable.

The CHAIRMAN: I doubt that it is fair m extend the debate to the conditions of ,;ervice in the Public Service.

Mr. TUCKER: I feel that it is from the way the Premier spoke today. I believe I have a right to intrude into that area as he did.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! I trust that the honourable gentleman is not arguing with the Chair.

Mr. TUCKER: I am not arguing with the Chair, but I trust that the Chair will give me the same right as has been afforded to the Premier.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! That is a reflection on the Chair and I ask the honour­able gentleman to withdraw it.

Mr. TUCKER: I withdraw it, but I also want to be able to--

The CHAIRMAN: Order! I do not want qualifications in the withdrawal. The Leader of the Opposition should well know that.

Mr. TUCKER: I am saying that I believe that public servants should be recognised as citizens, and should have the right of public comment. I am pressing that point.

I welcome the provisions of the Bill as a commendation of those public servants who have given years of meritorious service to the affairs of the State. It does really refer to those older members of the Public Service who came in long ago under the old scheme. It is very good that we have recognised that those people who have given meritorious service to the affairs of the State should have something done for them in this regard. I am pleased to hear of improvements in the conditions laid down in the amending Act of 1972. The persons concerned are to progress to better things.

The increased entitlement on early retire­ment will allow these officers, if they are so inclined, to plan sooner for their declining years with dignity and security. There will be those in the Public Service who will feel at 60 years of age they they would like to call it a day. They might feel that in the years ahead of them they would like to do something else. It is commendable that

by means of this increased entitlement we do allow earlier retirement if public servants so desire. There may be those in the Police Force who have the same attitude. We think the police should compulsorily retire at 60 years of age, as apparently we believe public servants should compulsorily retire at 65 years of age.

Similarly the recognition of past service now coming under the 1972 percentage scheme is worthy of praise. It is an expres­sion of appreciation to those public S'ervants who have served the State so well for so long.

The amending Bill is not in my hands at the moment. The Premier mentioned quite a number of proposed amendments in the Bill, but obviously I am unable to speak on them in detail at this time. Once the Bill is printed, the Opposition will go through it in fine detail, and we will distribute copies of it to interested people to obtain their opinion. Probably it will be favourably received all round. Again I indicate on behalf of the Opposition that we have no objection to the amendments proposed in the Bill. We believe that perhaps they should be adopted as soon as possible. I think that the fact that the Premier has introduced this Bill today indicates that he is of the same opinion. We will certainly look at the amendments but I do not think there will be any objection from the Opposition.

Mr. JENSEN (Bundaberg) (12.20 p.m.): I rise to support my Leader in some of the remarks he made about the Bill. Firstly, I can see why there are differe~t sup~r­annuation schemes. As my Leader JUst smd, the police retire at 60. It would be good to see one over-all superannuation scheme and have all members of the Public Service retire at 60 years of age, but I doubt whether that will eventuate.

I have always been in favour of super­annuation. I have held superannuation pol­icies since I first started work, but I am becoming very concerned about the present situation. I am also ceasing to wonder why public servants want an increase in the per­centages of pension received on eady retire­ment. There are officers in the Common­wealth Treasury Department who want to impose a supertax on superannuation pay­ments. I was very pleased that Mr. Crean said the other day that he was not in favour of this. If we are to have a supertax on everything a man saves, there will be no incentive for him to save. As I say, I have had insurance policies since 1934. They are only small-£500 or a £1,000 in those days-but by the time they mature the money will be worth nothing if inflation continues to increase. The return on the superannuation policies we have, whether they be Govern­ment ones or our own personal ones, is already growing smaller and smaller each year because of taxes imposed on insurance companies. This is concerning me and, I am sure, most officers in the Public Service.

1482 Superannuation &c., Bill (No. 2) [18 OCTOBER 1974] Snowy Mountains, &c., Bill

As my leader just said, these officers have done a good job and they deserve the super­annuation payments they will receive on retirement. But some public servants must be rather concerned at the moment about whether, within ·the next few years, a super­tax will be imposed on them. At the present time, 5 per cent of any lump sum received is taxed but if a real supertax is to be imposed on superannuation payments public servants might be wise to get their money out now and put it into a new home or something like that. That is my main concern about this Bill.

I hope that the Commonwealth Treasurer can do something to prevent any further eroding of these payments as it will destroy the incentive for people to save for their latter years. Otherwise, I, for one, have been wasting my money for the last 30 years. I could have spent it on racehorses and I might have made a fortune.

Hon. J. BJELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah -Premier) (12.23 p.m.), in reply: I thank the Leader of the Opposition and the honour­able member for Bundaberg for the support given to the Bill and the contributions they made. I appreciate their recognition of the worth of the Bill.

In reply to the suggestion that public servants should be allowed to voice their opmrons on various matters, I am sure that the Leader of the Opposition recognises that for a long time now the Governments of this State have continued to employ public servants throughout the State instead of changing them with each change of Govern­ment as they do in other countries where there is greater freedom in this area. Of course, we have witnessed instances in the Federal sphere in recent times of outsiders -union representatives and others-coming to the fore and occupying very important positions in the Public Service. This has caused a great deal of resentment and indeed, uproar. We know what the Common~ wealth Government's expressed intention to give greater freedom has led to. We all know the trouble, chaos and disunity that Mr. Perkins, for instance, caused in his department and with his Minister.

The other day, Mr. Renouf who was trav­elling on an aeroplane with the Prime Min­ister decided to speak out on his behalf. We all know the turmoil and strife that that led to. Mr. Renouf said that the Prime Minister was going to counter Mr. Connor's minerals policies. The Prime Minister denied that he authorised the statement; Mr. Renouf said that he did while Mr. Connor said he would not shift. We have very loyal public servan~s. We respect them and greatly appreciate the role they play.

I was interested to hear the comments made by the honourable member for Bunda­berg on superannuation schemes. I am glad to hear someone on the Opposition side speak ~JUt ~gainst the i.nroads that are made by mfiatron and the Imposition of special taxes,

such as supertax and capital gains tax, into private income. Taxes of this type are exceedingly wicked. Security that has been built up over the years, whether by way of contributions to superannuation funds or by the purchase of tangible assets, will be sub­ject to the imposition of this special tax. This is unbelievable.

The Commonwealth Government claims to be sympathetic towards the people. It has clearly demonstrated that it has no sympathy whatever and is determined to bring all people down to the one level. A person's lifetime savings will be virtually thrown over­board and destroyed. However, I am sure that this incredible action taken by the Federal Government will be ventilated more fully at both the State and Federal elections, and that ultimately it will be corrected by a change in Government.

Mr. Jensen interjected.

Mr. EJELKE-PETERSEN: It appears that the Federal Government, in its desire to gain greater control over people's incomes, finances and lives, adopted many suggestions put forward by Federal public servants. Be that as it may, I thank the two speakers for their comments on this worth-while measure.

Motion (Mr. Bjelke-Petersen) agreed to. Resolution reported.

FIRST READING

Bill presented and, on motion of Mr. Bjelke-Petersen, read a first time.

SNOWY MOUNTAINS ENGINEERING CORPORATION (QUEENSLAND) ACT AMENDMENT BILL

SECOND READING

Hon. J. BJELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah -Premier) (12.29 p.m.): I move-

"That the Biil be now read a second time."

At the introductory stage the Leader of the Opposition suggested that the amendment to the Act was due to unjustified suspicion of the Commonwealth. In reply, I point out that our assessment of what conld be done by the Snowy Mountains Engineering Cor­poration under the amended Commonwealth Act was based on legal advice. This advice "as supported by the views of other States' legal advisers also, and that is worth noting. We are merely taking precautionary action.

As always, we will co-operate, provided the Commom1 ealth is co-operative and prepared to offer reasonable compromise. But if the Commonwealth tries to wield the big stick in this respect, as it has done in other areas, as part of its centralist plans, we will be prepared.

The Snowy Mountains scheme, which is so often quoted, was a joint scheme between the Commonwealth Government and the State

Snowy Mountains Engineering [18 OcTOBER 1974] Corporation, &c., Bill 1483

Governments of New South Wales and Vic­toria. The enabling Act was supported by an agreement between those parties. In other words, it was a scheme between part­ners. We would be quite happy with a similar approach in Queensland. Our experience, however, with projects such as Pike Creek Dam makes us very wary. My word it does!

The honourable member for Barron River professed ignorance of the extent of work done by the Snowy Corporation. The cor­poration's report is in our Parliamentary Library. He can read it all there if he cares to do so.

Mr. Davis: Why don't you read it?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: I am aware of it, thanks to my general knowledge of the subject.

Last Friday I 'referred him to the annual reports of the Irrigation and Water Supply Commission, in which acknowledgments of its role are made regularly. To make it quite clear that we have no criticism of the corporation as such, the officers of the Irrigation and Water Supply Commission have indicated that their relations and liaison with the Snowy Corporation are excellent. To date, that commission, on behalf of the State Government, has paid the corpora­tion about $500,000 in fees for investigations of dam sites, and investigations and design and model testing, etc., of various projects in the period since 1970-71.

This work includes investigation and design of Fairbairn Dam, model testing and struc­tural design of the Monduran Dam spill­way, and model testing of Bingegang and Baralaba Weirs. A recommendation pre­sently under consideration is for authority to spend a further $450,000 on fees to the corporation for the investigation, design, etc., of a new dam. From this it should be quite clear that while the corporation acted under the original A<;t, and the terms agreed upon, we have had no real problems. However, if the Commonwealth changes the ground rules, we are entitled to act similarly­and that is all we are doing. Our amend­ment is similar to a provision that has been in the equivalent Act of another State since 1971.

The honourable member for Bundaberg asked how much the Snowy Corporation was brought into the Bundaberg scheme. As I said a few minutes ago, it carried out the model testing and structural design of the Monduran Dam spillway. I also point out that both the Department of National Development, prior to 1972, and the Depart­ment of Northern Development used the Snowy Corporation as their expert adviseTs in considering reports of schemes submitted to them for financial assistance, including the Bundaberg irrigation scheme.

The honourable member also said that I asked for and got $350,000, and that I then asked for another $4,400,000. For his infor­mation-and he ought to know his colleagues

in Canberra better than that-the $350,000 was never received; we did not get it. That was the pattern in many cases such as the Pike Creek Dam and so on. The Common­wealth subsequently advised that it would be included in, and become part of, the promised $4,400,000. It squibbed on the payment of $350,000 and included it in the larger amount. As I said to the hon­ourable member, that is one of the reasons why the rate of work slowed down-the Commonwealth did not pay the $350,000 that it had promised.

Mr. Jensen: Why don't you get it if it has promised it?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: I should like the honourable member to tell me how we can get the Commonwealth to honour its promises. If he can solve that problem, he is the best solver of problems in this State.

In 1974-75, use will be made of water in Monduran Dam as it will be released into the Kolan River for diversion by farmers in that area and sufficient water will be pumped into reticulation channels in the Gooburrum area to commence supplying farmers there. That is good news.

Mr. Jensen: When will that happen?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: In 1974-75 the water will be pump-released to the Kolan River for diversion by farmers in that area.

The honourable member for Stafford wondered whether the corporation has the right to be in Queensland. The Act and the amending legislation give it that right, but subject, if necessary, to such conditions as the State feels are required to protect State interests. I am sure honourable mem­bers would agree with that.

The honourable member also mentioned that projects like the Snowy Mountains scheme could be of great advantage to the State. I agree with him. If the Commonwealth is prepared to spend sums of the magnitude of the Snowy scheme in Queensland on the same basis as that scheme, that is, a partner­ship agreement, then it would find that Queensland would be co-operative.

I will now deal with the individual clauses of the Bill.

Clause 1, of course, gives a title to the Act. Clause 2 amends section 4 by requiring

that the exercise of a function by the cor­poration which is not within the legislative power of the Commonwealth to authorise, but which may be authorised by the Parlia­ment of the State, is authorised by this Act, subject howev,er to the provisions of this Act.

Subsection 2 of section 4 of the principal Act is deleted. This dealt with the need for the corporation to obtain the approval of the Commonwealth Minister. We are now pro­viding that the approval of the State ¥inister administering this Act must be obtamed .to provide authority for the Snowy Mountams

1484 Snowy Mountains Engineering (18 OCTOBER 1974] Corporation, &c., Bill

Engineering Corporation to act in the pre­scribed State fields. Therefore the question of .the corporation's obtaining the Common­wealth Minister's approval for the corpora­tion's action is a domestic matter which is not the State's concern.

Clause 3 adds new sections 5 and 6 to the principal Act.

New section 5 provides that .the corpora­tion cannot exercise in Queensland functions normally performed by State Government departments, local authorities or statutory bodies unless the approval has first been obtained of the Minister administering this Act. Such approval, if given, may be subject to such conditions as the Minister thinks fit.

New section 6 makes it clear that the authority conferred on the corporation by this Act does not confer such authority to exercise a function, unless in so doing the corporation-

( a) complies with every State law con­cerned with the work proposed; and

(b) where the exercise is subject to approval under section 5, complies in every respect with the conditions (if any) specified in the approval of the Minister administering this Act.

It is not desired to prevent the Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation's ser­vices being availed of by private persons or companies or to prevent the carrying out of private contracts.

Tt is desired that the State have the neces­sary legislative power to regulate the cor­poration's performance of work where such work is ordinarily the function of those departments, bodies and authorities set out in new section 5.

In the past, ·this State has made use of the knowledge and expertise of both the Snowy Mountains Hydro Electric Authority and its successor in this field-the Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation.

As I remarked earlier, the officers of depart­ments concerned confirm that their working relations with their Snowy counterparts have been cordial and co-operative. On our part we desire that our working relationship con­tinues in that way. Our amendment of this Act is designed to ensure that that situation continues on terms acceptable to this State.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. TUCKER (Townsville West-Leader of the Opposition) (12.39 p.m.): On behalf of the Opposition I indicate that we will not be opposing these amendments. Because the operative words contained in the Bill are "subject to the provisions of this Act", "complies at all times with every law of the State" and "with the conditions (if any) specified by the Minister in his approval to the Corporation's engaging in the exercise", obviously it would be ill advised and very stupid to oppose these amendments.

If we opposed those provisions, the firs! thing that would be said would be that we were opposed to our Minister and to his taking part in deciding certain things within the State; that we were more or less indicating that we did not want people or corporations to comply with the laws of the State and that we were against the principle of their being subject to the provisions of our own Act. On behalf of the Opposition I say quite frankly that we are not so politically stupid that we would faH into thal trap.

It is regrettable that the Premier is on a collision course in introducing this kind of amendment. He said he obtained legal advice before introducing the BilL I suppose it was the same kind of legal advice that he received on appeals to the Privy Council and the Queen of Queensland.

Mr. Bjelke-Petersen: It was very good advice.

Mr. TUCKER: It is the same kind of legal advice. Obviously the Premier could get legal advice to the effect that he can do anything he wishes. However, as I said, he is on a collision course and has been for a long time. He continually seeks to confront the Federal authorities and, because of his attitude, I do not believe that we are winning.

Mr. Frawley: He won't allow them to stand over him, that's why.

Mr. TUCKER: I suppose it could be interpreted that way. That is an example of the thinking of some of the small minds on the Government side.

lf we sought co-operation and harmony instead of adopting the hard line that the Premier takes in these matters, we would receive a lot more. The Premier is always seeking confrontation and, because of his action, nobody in Queensland is winning; we are losing out. It is not necessary for us to have to do this at all. We could have lived in harmony with the Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation. It would not have done anything detrimental to Queensland. In fact, Queensland could have gained a great deal from it. Immediately the Government takes this sort of action, resentment is created in the Federal authority and I repeat that it is regrettable.

The same sort of conflict has been created. if I might draw an analogy, in regard to Aborigines. There is a confrontation in this matter today. Both sides are lined up and ultimately one will knock the other over. It does not matter whether one is on the side of the Commonwealth or the State; because of that confrontation, somebody will lose. It is politically stupid to have it. The only people who will lose out eventually will be the Queenslanders themselves or, in the analogy I drew, the Aborigines. It is a stupid sort of confrontation and collision course adopted by the Premier and his Government

Snowy Mountains Engineering i[l8 OcTOBER 1974] Corporation, &c., Bill 1485

I have looked at the Bill. I wonder what would happen if the Australian Government adopted the Premier's attitude and took him on. Would the next step be a Common­wealth move to test the legality of this legislation? As it is now, the State is all the time testing the legality of Federal legisla­tion. I wonder whether the Australian Gov­ernment will test the legality of this legisla­tion.

Mr. Bjelke-Petersen: surprised at all.

would not be

Mr. TUCKER: I would be sorry to see it. Nevertheless, it could happen, and if there is a clash between State and Commonwealth Acts, Queensland will lose.

I make those comments to let everyone in Queensland know where the Opposition stands, and that this kind of fuel is being thrown on the fire at every opportunity.

Mr. Lickiss: Now you are indicating to the public that you are just as much a centralist as those in Canberra.

Mr. TUCKER: I, too, have a right to speak out on behalf of those whom I represent. There are many people who today are being sickened by the State Government's con­stant confrontation with the Federal Govern­ment. Perhaps the Premier initially gained some advantage because people said, "Good on the Premier. He's sticking up for the State." But they are beginning to think harder now, and they are starting to wonder what is happening in this continual con­frontation. Many are now saying that if this confrontation continues, whether it be in State affairs or the affairs of committees on which Government members sit, something will have to be done about it, because the proper affairs of the State and the Com­monwealth are not continuing whilst the pre­sent state of affairs prevails.

I say that what is happening is not good for Queensland, and the legislation now under consideration continues the confrontation and keeps the State and Commonwealth on a collision course. The Bill is another pin­pricking measure directed by the Premier against the Commonwealth, and the people will suffer because of it. I have made the point, and I do not wish to labour it. I have put forward the view of the Opposi­tion, and in a very short time I believe that the majority of Queenslanders will react in the same way.

Mr. JENSEN (Bundaberg) (12.47 p.m.): I support the remarks of my leader concerning confrontation between the State and Federal Governments. However, I do not wish to bring that into the remarks that I propose to make now.

I was interested in the Premier's speech, especially his reference to the $350,000 for the Bundaberg irrigation scheme. I think that that was a Cabinet decision made about last December, or a little later.

Mr. Bjelke-Petersen: A Federal Cabinet decision.

Mr. JENSEN: It was a decision of Federal Cabinet, and it was made last December. It has nothing to do with the $4,400,000 in the Budget.

Mr. Bjelke-Petersen: The Federal Govern­ment still included it in that figure. It said, "We will give it to you in the $4,400,000."

Mr. JENSEN: The Federal Government gave the State Government $350,000. If the State Government did not bill the Federal Government for that amount, I blame the State Government. If it was not obtained, it is probably because of the confrontation to which my leader referred. The State Government was at that time given a grant of $350,000 by a decision of the Federal Government. Dr. Rex Patterson put it through Federal Cabinet, and the State Gov­ernment was supposed to receive it. If the State did not receive it, the reason is that it did nothing about trying to obtain it. It should have obtained this money and used it.

Mr. Frawley: That's a lot of rubbish.

Mr. JENSEN: It is idle for Government members to say, "That's a lot of rubbish."

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member is not obliged to heed interjections.

Mr. JENSEN: The Premier knows that this was a Cabinet decision on a submission made by Dr. Rex Patterson, and such a decision should be implemented by the Federal Treasurer.

Mr. Lee: What do you think of the cen­tralist attitude of the Canberra Government?

Mr. JENSEN: As it would be out of order to deal with that matter on the second reading of a Bill, I do not propose to do so. Mr. Speaker would pull me up very quickly if I did.

In yesterday's "Telegraph", the first of the letters to the editor supported what has been said by the Leader of the Opposition about confrontation between the State and Federal Governments. The WTiter said that the percentage of unemployment is lower in the Labor States than in the Liberal and National Party States, and that the situation was the worst in Queensland where there had been a rise of 160 per cent in the number unemployed. I do not know if that is true or not. That letter appear in yester­day's "Telegraph". The Premier may not have seen it.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! We are not con­cerned about any letters that appeared in the "Telegraph". I ask the honourable member to apply himself to the matter before the House.

1486 Snowy Mountains Engineering [18 OCTOBER 1974] Corporation, &c., Bill

Mr. JENSEN: I thought the Premier might have been interested in it. I hope the Premier does something about getting that $350,000, if he has spent it. If he did not spend it, O.K. If he slowed the work down and did not use it, that is one thing, but if he spent the money out of State funds it is his place to see that it is reimbursed to the Govern­ment.

Mr. LICKISS (Mt. Coot-tha) (12.51 p.m.): I was very pleased to have from the Leader of the Opposition a detailed reply to my interjection. He now sets his rudder in line with what one would expect from the Opposition. He said that the people of Queensland are not very happy. I can see now the reason for his worried look. He has now placed himself in line with his centralis! mates in Canberra and he says, "There is no price to be paid for the rights of the State." On numerous occasions parts of the Common­wealth Constitution under which we in this country live have been brought before the people for alteration by way of referendum, but with very little success. As the Federal Government cannot get the Constitution changed in that way, it is usurping State sovereignty by underhand and devious methods, not the least of which is its attempt to buy out our State by fiscal means. The Premier has an obligation to protect the rights of the people. That is virtually what the Bill is doing.

Mr. K. J. Hooper interjected.

Mr. LICKISS: Empty vessels make the most sound, and the honourable member is rattling like an old tin can.

In matters such as this the Opposition strenuously tries to create an atmosphere by accusing members of the Queensland Govern­ment of being obstructionists. The Queens­land Government is protecting the rights of the people under the State Constitution and under the Commonwealth Constitution. I stand firmly behind the Premier when he says that we will not be bought out by the centralists in Canberra.

Federal Ministers have already said that they believe in the Marxist principles and in doing away with the free-enterprise system. That was reported in the newspapers yester­day. Every move the Commonwealth Government has made since it came into office in 1972 has been to subvert State sovereignty. In the interests of the people we represent, it is up to this Government to ensure that that does not happen in Queensland. All other State Premiers and State Governments, irrespective of political colour, are equally trying to defend their own States against this power-hungry centralis! Government in Canberra which, by fair means or foul, seeks to break down the constitutional system in Australia and intro­duce the so-called Cairns new system and bring this country right into the socialist camp.

I very strongly support the Premier in what he is endeavouring to do today. When­ever the Commonwealth Government intrudes on State sovereignty we, as a Government with sovereignty equal to Canberra's, should be able to say to it, "This far, but no further!"

Hon. J. BJELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah -Premier) (12.55 p.m.), in reply: I thank the honourable member for Mt. Coot-tha for his remarks, which very clearly set out the exact position.

In reply to the honourable member for Bundaberg I want to say that I do not know why he will not accept the fact that we did not get the $350,000 we were to receive. He implied that my two officers are liars. As Premier of this State, I am telling him--

Mr. JENSEN: I rise to a point of order. I would not even consider calling the Premier's officers liars. I said it was the Premier's place to bill ,the Government and see that he got the money.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order.

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: I can inform the honourable member that we did not get the money. The people in Canberra talk money but we do not get it. I instance the millions of dollars we were to get for the Pike Creek Dam, which we did not get. They backed off. They promised us $22,000,000 each year for free hospitals in Queensland, which we did not get. They were going to give us $500,000 last year to fight the spur­throated locust, and we did not get a cent. They promised us free grants to acquire urban land, and we did not get a cent. I could go on and on. They talk money but they do not give it-and we did not receive or sight this $350,000.

Mr. Jensen interjected.

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: Of course we asked for it; we sought to g,et it. As I told the honourable member before, if he can devise a method of getting the people in Canberra to stick by their promises and agreements, he is a very clever man.

The Leader of the Opposition indicated that we were on a collision course with the Commonwealth Government. He seems to imply that he wants us to lie down or get out of the way and let the Commonwealth Gov­ernment take over and steam-roll straight ahead. Nobody must oppose them. He said that, in the interes,ts of harmony, we should get out of the way; we should back down and bow to them. As the honourable member for Mt. Coot-tha said, this is a very clear indication of what the attitude of the Leader of the Opposition would be if hon­ourable members opposite were on this side of the House as the Government of this State. This cannot, and will not, be allowed by the people of Queensland. It reminded me of Munich-peace at any price. We are

Optometrists Bill [18 OCTOBER 1974] Optometrists Bill 1487

not supposed to oppose these people. Does the Leader of the Opposition think that is fair, or right, or just, to the States?

The previous Liberal-Country Party Gov­ernment came to the State and asked us would we agree >tO the setting up of the Snowy Mountains Authority on the basis it was on before this Commonwealth Govern­ment came to office, and we agreed. But immediately the colleagues of the Leader of of the Opposition came to office they changed the Act without consulting us in any way. Without any consultation, they changed the deal we had made with the previous Com­monwealth Government, giving the authority the right to come into this or any other State and without consultation, undertake any work it wishes to undertake. If the Leader of the Opposition says that by taking the action we did we are on a collision course, then I agree with him. Of course we are, and I am quite sure that in this case as in so many others, the Commonwealth Govern­ment will learn that in Queensland they cannot run over the top of people or take from us the rights and responsibilities that belong to the people of Queensland.

Motion (Mr. Bjelke-Petersen) agreed to.

COMMITTEE

(The Chairman of Committees, Mr. Lickiss, Mt. Coot-tha, in the chair)

Clauses 1 to 3, both incLusive, as read, agreed to.

Bill reported, without amendment. [Sitting suspended from 1 to 2.15 p.m.]

OPTOMETRISTS BILL

!NITIA TION IN COMMITTEE

(The Chairman of Committees, Mr. Lickiss, Mt. Coot-tha, in the chair)

Hon. S. D. TOOTH (Ashgrove-Minister for Health) (2.15 p.m.): I move-

"That a Bill be introduced relating to ,the qualifications and registration of optom­etrists and the regulation of the practice of optometry, and for purposes connected therewith."

Legislation already exists in these respects under the title "The Optometrists Acts, 1917 to 1965", but these Acts were last consoli­dated in 1956 and, following amendments enacted in 1959 and 1965, it is not easy to ascertain the current law with respect to optometrists and the practice of optometry.

That situation has been further aggravated by the need for deletion of various pro­visions which have become redundant and over a11 the present legislation has undoubt­edly reached the stage where it could be categorised as exemplifying the type of law which has caused concern to the Law Reform Commission and has given rise to that com­mission's opinion that a great service would

be rendered not only to members of the public and the legal profession but also to Public Service officers administering such laws if they were made more accessible.

This Bill has been drafted therefore to provide for repeal of the Optometrists Acts, 1917 to 1965 and for introduction of a new Optometrists Act which, whilst adhering generally to the principles of the existing Act and consolidating various existing pro­visions, also has its provisions set out in a more orderly manner, updates various of them to conform with similar provisions in other legislation administered through the composite office of the various professional boards and ensures that redundant provisions do not continue to hamper the clarity of legislation relating to optometrists and the practice of optometry.

The Bill has been drafted in four parts together with a schedule listing the legislative enactments to be repealed by the Bill, and explanatory notes printed to be supplied with the Bill set out in general terms the provisions contained in each part.

Whilst I propose to enlarge on those notes, where necessary, during the second reading of the Bill, I point out ,that the contents of the Bill represent provisions along similar lines to those contained in the relevant leg­islation of each of the other professional boards and include authority for the pro­posed new Act to be administered by ,the Minister for Health and, subject to him, by the registration board constituted under the Act.

The other provisions are related, in brief, to the constitution of a registration board, its tenure of office, appointments of a chair­man and deputy chairman, filling of casual vacancies, conduct of board meetings, allow­ances payable to members of the board, appointments of the registrar of the board and other staff, manner of keeping the board's accounts, keeping of a register, qual­ifications to be recognised for registration pur­poses, payment of annual licence and other fees, keeping of accounts, disciplinary action exercisable by the board, entitlement to appeals against the board's refusal to reg­ister or disciplinary action taken, prohibition against the prescribing or administering of drugs, prohibition against the practice of optometry by an unregistered person, restric­tions in respect of the practice of optometry by bodies or associations, corporate or unin­corporate, fraudulent practices, by-law making powers and penalties in respect of breaches of the proposed new Act.

In brief, those provisions and others related to them have similar objects to those of like provisions in legislation governing the prac­tlces of other professional people and the cont~n.ts of the Bill may be summed up as provisiOns to ensure that only qualified optometrists practise optometry.

. :Vhilst I mentioned earlier that ,the pro­VI~IO!!s of the Bill adhere generally to the pnnc1ples of the existing legislation, the Bill

1488 Optometrists Bill [18 OcTOBER 1974] Optometrists Bill

differs in some respects sought by the present Board of Optometrical Registration, the more important of these being-

1. The title of the board is to be altered, at the board's request to "The Optometrists Board of Queensland";

2. The designation of "Optometrist" is adopted .for a person qualified and regis­tered to practise optometry in lieu of the present "Certified Optometrist";

3. A new definition of "Optometry" is introduced, this being to the effect of a definition adopted by the International League of Optometrists;

4. Authority is provided for the executor, administrator or trustee of a deceased optometrist to carry on, for a reasonable time, the practice of optometry conducted by the deceased at the date of his death;

5. The ownership of an optometrical practice is restricted to an optometrist or to a body or association of persons, corporate or unincorporate, comprised exclusively of optometrists;

6. Qualifications entitling the holders to Queensland registration as optometrists are set out in greater and more definite detail;

7. Monetary penalties for breaches of the Act have been updated to present-day values; and

8. The authority for licensing of persons to sell spectacles has been deleted. I emphasise that this does not affect the position applying at present in respect of such bodies as Optical Prescriptions Spectacle Makers Pty. Ltd.

Mr. Burns: Did you say that the section licensing the sale of spectacles is to be deleted?

Mr. 'I'OOTII: This relates to businesses that sell spectacles, such as Woolworths and so on.

It will be quite evident from my comments that this Bill does not provide for any contentious departures from the existing Optometrists Acts and that the chief reason for its introduction is in the interests of clarity.

As I indicated earlier, it is my intention to explain the provisions of the Bill in greater detail, where necessary, after honourable members have had the opportunity to examine it and the accompanying general explanatory notes, but I feel they will agree that the introduction of the Bill is warranted since its primary purpose is to reprovide existing legislation in a clearer and more orderly form.

I commend the motion to the Committee.

Mr. BURNS (Lytton) (2.23 p.m.): I do not think anyone will object to the proposal that we should consolidate the Act. As a result of amendments over the years, it is not easy to follow through and ascertain the current law. Many of our Acts are in a similar state. I am sure that we would all

welcome their repeal and the introduction of new legislation to make the laws of the land easier to read, follow and understand.

Mr. Miller: The Local Gover11J!llent Act, particularly.

Mr. BURNS: I do not think we can pick on any particular Act. Most of them are in the same state. I think we should say, "Thank you very much" to those who had the fore­sight to do something about this Act, and I hope that they devote their attention to a number of other Acts.

Having listened to the Minister's speech, I am interested mainly in the removal of the section reading-

"Persons selling spectacles to be licensed. Subject to this Act, any person of or over the age of twenty-five years shall, upon application to the Board and upon payment of the prescribed fee, be entitled without examination to be regis­tered as a spectacle-seller, and to receive a licence in that behalf from the Board in respect of the place to which his application relates:"

I have in mind the sale of ordinary sun­glasses. People can walk into any two-bob corner store, a local grocery shop or any discount house in town and see stacks of sunglasses for sale. Many of them have tags suggesting that in one way or another the glasses have been optometrically tested and that as a result the wearer's eyes will be quite safe. It is implied that people can venture out into the sun wearing those glasses and their eyes will be protected.

In the last couple of days we read in the Press that half a dozen people dam­aged their eyes by looking at the recent eclipse of the sun. I am certain that some of the very cheap spectacles being sold today for as little as $1.50 in seaside chemist shops, for example, offer no pro­tection at all from harmful rays. Surely we ought to register the sellers or have it clearly stated that particular glasses do not measure up to a specified optometrical standard.

Dr. Crawford: False advertising.

Mr. BURNS: Yes, it is.

A person down at the beach says to him­self, "I am having trouble with my eyes. I will buy a pair of sunglasses." On enter­ing a shop he is met with an advertising spiel that tells him that brand ''A" is better than brand "B", that the glasses will pro­tect the eyes and not cause any problems. He pays his money and then discovers that an optometrist had nothing at all to do with their manufacture. Probably they were manufactured in Taiwan or some other part of the world, where even the effect of the ult'fa-violet rays from the sun may be different.

Mrs. Jordan: In fact, they could be harm­ful.

Optometrists Bill [18 OCTOBER 1974] Optometrists Bill 1489

Mr. BURNS: They could be, yes. They could have an adverse effect. A person could buv those glasses and lie in the sun all d;;y on the beach at Surfers Paradise look­ing through them at the sun and be doing his eyes grave damage, although he felt that in purchasing those glasses and wearing them he was protecting his eyes.

:'v1r. Murray: Often the chemist is inclined to pose as a bit of an expert.

Mr. BtJRNS: That is the point I am trying to make.

When reading the legislation this morn­ing I thought to myself, "We ought to begin strengthening the provision relating to the registration of spectacle salesmen or other people who sell glasses under the guise that they will be of some help." It does not seem to me that we should be amending the law today to allow the local corner store to sell glasses, which is what I think will happen when the licensing provision is removed. At least under the licensing pro­vision the Act provided, through the appoint­ment of inspectors, for the enforcement of the legislation and the maintenance of standards.

I would like the Minister to explain fully his reasons for allowing such people to sell ordinary glasses in this way, let alone ~unglasses. It appears to me to be a definite weakness, although obviously we will have to wait until we read the provision or receive an explanation from the Minister.

l have a couple of other points I wish to raise. Irr the last few years everybody will have had some experience or knowledge of the problem associated with free spectacle frames. Some older members of this Parliament will have had experience of it for 30 years. I refer to the embarrass­ment that free spectacle frames cause to our old people who go to the hospitals for eve tests. These senior citizens are sent off to the optometrist, or to the people who supply spectacles, to be provided with a pair of glasses. I know that this matter is not covered by this Bill, but some of !he frames supplied today carry a message as bright as a neon sign: "Supplied on the cheap as a charity." There ought to be a way that the Department of Health, hos­pital boards and those responsible for calling tenders for spectacles can do something about frame standards. In this day and age we ~hould not countenance frames of such a poor standard.

Whilst on the subject of eyes let me say that I have always been concerned at the very low standard of some of the school nursing rooms where children's eyes are tested. One of the pleasing features of our Health Department and its services has been the idea of sending nurses out to the schools to test the health and eyesight of the young kiddies at least once or twice in their school life. I know of some very poor school sick-rooms. Usually they are rooms

stuck underneath the headmaster's office, sometimes even with galvanised iron walls. Some have a very poor standard of lighting. In some cases I do not think that the height of the ceiling would meet the local build­ing ordinances. To ask a school nurse to carry out tests on the eyes of children in those circumstances seems to me to be unreasonable. If those tests are to be car­ried out-and we must be spending a lot of money on providing that service; I con­gratulate the nursing staff on the service they provide-it seems to me that while that money is being spent to send nurses out, at least there should be first-class facilities at the school. If not, the problem should be overcome in some way perhaps by mobile units--

Mr. Miller: That doesn't happen in the Ithaca electorate.

Mr. BURNS: The honourable member is very lucky. His electorate was looked after by a Labor member for years-first by Bill Power, then by Pat Hanlon and later others. When the honourable member came along, he inherited the good conditions they had worked for. That is the luck of the game for him. His mismanagement of the elector­ate has not yet shown, but it will as he stays there a little longer.

Mr. Miller interjected.

Mr. BURNS: Don't start bucking. You put your nose in and I gave it a tweak. Now you are starting to complain.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member will please address the Chair.

Mr. BURNS: I realise that my next point is probably not covered by the Bill but we should consider it. It is the conducting of eye tests in industrial establishments. One of the major steps we ought to take to improve industrial safety is to test the standard of eyesight of some of our workers. We could start this off with State Govern­ment employees in railway yards and meat­works. If we can send out school nurses, we can send out similar people to carry out similar tests in industrial establishments. I realise that this is probably well outside the ambit of the Bill.

The only other point that struck me during the Minister's introduction was that the trustee of a deceased optometrist could carry on the business for a period. That is reasonable enough. I do not think we want to close a business down when an optome­trist dies. But obviously we need strict provisions written into the legislation because, in other cases, the Act provides that no-one can carry on such a business unless he is a trained and registered optometrist, and there is no other unqualified shareholder in the business. We will have to provide that ,there must be a trained operator on the job when customers are being dealt with. Other­wise we would only be breaking down the other standards.

1490 Optometrists Bill [18 OCTOBER 1974] Optometrists Bill

I hope that when the fines are updated they will be so large that people will be deterred from offending against the Act. I hope that they are not similar to the fines in many other Acts which are so small that they do not threaten a wrongdoer in any way and are of no value.

I shall not delay the Committee any longer. I await the printing of the Bill with interest.

Dr. CRAWFORD (Wavell) (2.32 p.m.): The Law Reform Commission is currently undertaking a comprehensive overhaul of Queensland Statutes, and that is a .v~ry worth-while activity. The curren.t rey1s10n of the laws relating to optometnsts 1s, of course, in no way related to the over-all situation with which the Law Reform Com­mission is involved.

However, it is important that redundant laws be expunged from the Statute .Book, and as the law relating to the practice of optometrists was initia_llY. pl~ced . on the Statute Book in 1917, 1t IS h1gh time that it was reviewed and brought up to ~a!e to conform to 1974 standards. The admmlstra­tive aspects of such laws are, of course, a necessary part of the whole scene .but are not of specific interest to the Committee.

One must define "optometry" adequately, and I commend the thought exp~esse~ ~y the Minister that a definition wh1ch IS m accordance with that recently promulgated .by the International League of Optometnsts should also apply in Queensland. I ~ave remarked in this Chamber on many occaswns that I refuse, in any circumstances, to accept any decrease in or depreciation of profes­sional standards, and it is importm;t that a group of people such as opto~etnsts, "':ho give to the community ll: serv1ce of h1gh calibre, should be mamtamed at !hat par­ticular level. I remind the Comm1ttee that the Queensland Institute of Technolog~ is responsible for the training of optometn~ts, and it is important that the stan~ard. wh1ch is set in that institution be mamtamed.

It is important that the qualifications of Queensland optometrists b~ accept.ed in other parts of this country and mternatwnally. In addition to maintaining our own standards, we must maintain definitions of those standards that are acceptable in other parts of the world in which Queensland graduates are likely to practise.

One or two representations have been made to me by groups who are concerned about some aspects of the Bill. The main conce.rn has been expressed by those who practise orthoptics. I had to look up the meaning of that word and I make no apology for that. It means,' literally, the straight eye-keeping eyes straight in muscular balance. There are very few practising orthoptics in Queensland. The honourable member for South Brisbane,

of course, has one eye on the weather and one on the newspaper. There is a very small group of girls most of whom have been trained at an institute in Sydney-it is attached, I understand, to the University of New South Wales-and they play an essential part in the servicing and treatment of eyes in our community. The girls who practise orthoptics work under the guidance and over­all surveillance of eye doctors-the ophthal­mologists-and they carry out, under the careful supervision of those doctors, the necessary exercises to correct lazy eyes and to make sure that the muscles are balanced correctly.

Mr. Murray: By referral?

Dr. CRAWFORD: Always by referral. They have a very detailed training, and they are a very specialised section of the over-all eye scene. It is essential that these girls, and their skills, be maintained under the direction of eye doctors, just as physio­therapists work under the supervision of orthopaedic surgeons and other specialist medical practitioners.

It is important to ensure that under no circumstances is any other body allowed to control the activities of orthoptic practitioners. About 12 to 15 years ago, provision was written into a similar Act in New South Wales that there should be some co-ordination between orthoptic practitioners and optom­etrists. It is not the intention of the Health Department in Queensland to incorporate orthoptic practitioners with optometrical practitioners in any way. I checked that point very carefully yesterday with one of the officers concerned, and I have an absolute assurance on that point. The girls who prac­tice orthoptics have been worried that what applies in New South Wales could apply in Queensland.

I also checked with the parliamentary draftsman who drew up the Bill that its wording is in no way ambiguous, because words can often be interpreted in a way that is different from the original intent. I have his assurance that there is no way in which, on a legal interpretation, the girls practising orthoptics could be said to be under the control of the optometrical board or any other optometrical association. That is impor­tant, because it implies that, in the event of any challenge to the legislation, the legal interpretation would be that orthoptic prac­titioners are autonomous, and must remain so.

My legal advice is that if the word "orthoptic" was written into the Bill it could, by implication, mean that in some way orthoptists had to be involved in the optometric act. It is good that it has not been written into the proposed Bill. It is essential from the point of view of the autonomy of their practice that these girls remain as they are, under the general super­vision of eye doctors. As the Committee is well aware, there is no connection whatever

Optometrists Bill (18 OCTOBER 1974] Optometrists Bill 1491

between practising opthalmologists, or eye doctors, and those who engage in optometri­cal practice. They are completely separate, and in normal circumstances they practise without any reference to each other. Of course, a patient may be referred from one to another, but that is a different matter.

I wanted to make that point because I believe that these young ladies who do such a valuable job, particulady in correcting deficiencies in eye-muscle balance in young people, should be allowed to practise as they are now practising. The assurances I have received from the Health Department and from the "legal eagles" in the Justice Department satisfy me completely that the situation will continue as it is, that the proposed Bill is in all ways a reputable one, and that the Committee can support it without any reservations.

Mr. JENSEN (Bundaberg) (2.42 p.m.): I believe that what the Minister is doing is quite correct in certain respects, but today I want to mention the racket in the optometrists' field in the supply of spectacles.

As the Minister knows, the hospitals let out contracts for the supply of free spectacles to pensioners. Pensioners can obtain free spectacles as long as they are prepared to accept the frames that are supplied. A pen­sioner cannot have lenses put into frames of his choice. If a pensioner wants special frames, he has to go to the office of the optometrist and pay from $10 to $20 for them. I have asked what the frames really cost. Optometrists are buying them for a couple of shillings. The cost of frames is infinitesimal. I have received many complaints from the Pensioners' League in Bundaberg about pensioners having to accept the frames that are available.

At least in Bundaberg three different types of frames are available now. A previous optometrist who was supplying the Bunda­berg Hospital contracted to supply three types and later wanted to supply only one type. When the next contract was let, Henderson agreed to supply three types. The. contracting optometrists always try to get out of supplying more than one type. At one stage the contract in Bundaberg was given to a Bundaberg optometrist. I understand it was put in the contract that he had to supply at least two different types of frame. Pensioners cannot get broken frames replaced with other than the frames being supplied at the hospital without paying dearly for them.

The whole thing is a racket. I know of an optometrist in Brisbane who will supply pensioners, trades unionists and others with spectacles at less than half the price charged by other optometrists. I went along to him to prove it, and here are the glasses in my hand.

Mr. Baldwin: Would you say the profit was in the wrapping?

Mr. JENSEN: I do not know. The profit is not in the testing, nor is it in the lenses. It is tied up in the business somewhere, because this optometrist in Brisbane will supply glasses for less than half the usual price.

The frames supplied under the contracts that the Minister gives to optometrists cost them about 10c a pair. But what do they make out of them? Ask any hospital man­ager what the contracts these optometrists get are worth to them a year in their private practices. I know that the hospital contract in Bundaberg was worth over $8,000 a year to the optometrist. He does not have to worry about the 10c fee for a pair of glasses. He takes the contract for what he gets out of it in the private field. In some cases he would tell pensioners that they needed bifocals, but the hospital board does not supply bifocals. I believe the Minister intends to make provision for their supply, but I do not know whether he has done so yet. I may be wrong in that.

The optometrist tells them that they need bifocals and they go down to his office where they are charged $30 or $40. They should ask for two pairs of free glasses and receive them for nothing. The racket in this game of optometry is in the provision of both frames and lenses. I do not mind the doctor who tests a person's eyes charging $10, or $5 as any other doctor does. The patient pays the $10 or $5 for that test but then, when the glasses are made for him, it costs him $40 to $50 even though they cost the optometrist only a few cents.

Mr. R. E. Moore: Thirty dollars.

Mr. JENSEN: It is higher than that now. It was $30 two years ago. The price is now up to $40 or $50. Some of the frames alone now cost $30. I obtained mine for $12 and they are similar to the ones that cost $30. That is the racket the Minister needs to look at.

I do not mind any man who is trained in his profession getting a fair go. We all know that a television technician or a plumber charges $5 to $10 a ,service call. A similar fee is warranted for testing a person's eyes. But I do not believe we should allow the racket that is going on in the sale of frames. This Bill will further protect the optometrists because I think it provides that glasses can no longer be sold in places like Woolworths. Is that so?

Mr. Tooth: That is right.

Mr. JENSEN: What about the optometrist who has a shop in Woolworths and makes the glasses himself? I do not know whether he would be allowed to make glasses and

1492 Optometrists Bill [18 OCTOBER 1974] Optometrists Bill

sell them through Woolworths. Today, many chemists have their own shops in Woolworths and other big stores. I do not know whether an optometrist in such a set-up could set out glasses and let people pick their own. Will that be allowed? I can well remember when a person could purchase a pair of glasses at Woolworths for 2s. 6d. A nros­pective buyer could try them all on until he found a pair that suited.

Mr. Baldwin: Try before you buy.

Mr. JENSEN: Yes. Today the same people can go to a public hospital and get a pair of glasses free providing they accept the frames. If I were a pensioner I would not mind accepting the glasses they supply; they are quite reasonable. But some people, even though they get things free, must whinge about them. They complain, "I don't like those frames; they are too thin," or "they are the wrong colour." The frames supplied in Bundaberg were quite satisfac­tory, and I would not take seriously any­one who complains about them. I would certainly wear them. I am not so stuck up as to insist on a special pair of glasses. What I do complain about is the racket involved in a person's having to pay $20 for special frames or replacement lenses.

Mr. Marginson: The Minister will blame the hospital board.

Mr. JENSEN: I don't think he would do that. He has tried to protect some of the hospital boards that have been letting contracts to persons who should not have received them. At one time, however, he did not protect the optometrist in Bundaberg, who submitted a tender after tenders had closed and was therefore unsuccessful in obtaining the contract that year. However, the following year he was given a contract because the Tory hospital board in Bunda­berg asked that he be given it. The hospital board gave the contract to Henderson for a year, and last year the Minister gave it back to the other optometrist.

Mr. Tooth: I did not.

Mr. JENSEN: The hospital board did­with the Minister's approval. I have tele­phoned his secretary many times on behalf of pensioners and other people of Bundaberg, and you know quite well--

The CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member will address the Chair.

Mr. JENSEN: I want to tell you, Mr. Lickiss, what the Minister did.

Mr. Frawley: You can't even see the Chair without your glasses.

Mr. JENSEN: I am long-sighted. All I need glasses for is reading the small print.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! I suggest that the honourable member is wasting the time of the Committee.

Mr. JENSEN: l am long-sighted and I have a long memory. I can well remember what the Minister has done over the past few years. Although he did the right thing on one occasion, he later turned a backwards somersault.

As I say, the glasses supplied to the pen­sioners in Bundaberg are quite satisfactory, but the optometrists are running a racket. They are earning up to $8,000 or $10,000 a year from the contracts let by the hospital board. These figures can easily be verified.

Mr. CASEY (Mackay) (2.53 p.m.): l regret that owing to a previous commitment I was unable to hear the Minister's intro­ductory speech. I should like him to give an assurance either in his reply or at the second-reading stage that the good work that is being done by country optometrists throughout the State will be protected by the Bill.

The practice of optometry in country areas is entirely different from that in Brisbane and some of the other larger cities, where the services of eye specialists or ophthalmologists are readily available. In the country towns the optometrists do not have easy access to the knowledge and skill of those specialists.

I have continually complained about the unavailability of certain specialist care to people who live in country areas. It is regret­table that someone with a serious defect in his eyesight is required to travel up to 250 or 300 miles, or even further, to receive specialist treatment from an ophthalmologist. When a person lives in such an area he appreciates the out~tanding work done by optometrists.

As the Minister should know, there are far more optometrists in Queensland than there are optha1mologists. Optometrists practise in the bigger towns and cities, and visit smaller towns. In my area they travel 50, 100 or 120 miles every fortnight or three weeks. People with eye defects get from them expert advice on what should be done for their eye problems. In some ways an optometrist is far more capable of assessing them than an opthalmologist, because an optometrist by his training specialises in light refraction, whereas the opthalmologist specialises in opthalmology, and light refraction is a secondary subject for him.

I am concerned that, in consolidating the Act, some sections are to be abolished. It seems that certain places will not be able to sell spectacle frames and spectacles. I am fearful-and so are country optometrists­that any weakening of the existing structure under the Act will leave the door wide open to the Guild of Dispensing Opticians, which is virtua11y a front organisation for a com­pany known as O.P.S.M. It is one of the major dispensers of spectacles throughout the State, under certain contracts with hospital boards, which, as the honourable member for Bundaberg pointed out, specif,y that an optometrist must examine people's eyes.

Optometrists Bill (18 OCTOBER 1974) Optometrists Bill 1493

[f any weakening of the structure of the Act allow~ O.P.S.M. to spread its operations into all areas of the State, that move will be to the detriment of the eyesight of people generally. Certainly it will be to the detri­ment of optometrist's work in areas where opthalmologists are not readily available to carry out examinations.

That is the main point on which I want some assurance from the Minister. I raise the matter at this stage so that he may assess my remarks and reply at this or the second­reading stage. If after hearing his remarks I am not particularly happy that there is sufficient cover, I shall make further observa­tions at a later stage.

Mr. DEAN (Sandgate) (2.58 p.m.): I have a few observations to make on this very important Bill relating to the qualifications and regulation of optometrists and the prac­tice of optometry. Insufficient importance is placed on the prescribing and selling of sun­glasses. At present anyone can sell sun­glasses, whether they are good or bad. Some people say that there is no such thing as a bad pair of sunglasses, that any type will do provided they minimise the glare, or give relief to people who find the sun's glare dis­turbing. I hope the Minister will give thought to the ease with which many people may pur­chase sunglasses. I understand that some sunglasses can be very dangerous, and I have been told by optometrists and oculists that damage can be done to the eyes if natural sunlight is broken down too much. The medical practitioners in the Assembly may support that, unless I have been misinformed.

The other observation I desire to make is that the aged and infirm people living on the north side of Brisbane find it most incon­venient to travel to the Princess Alexandra Hospital, which is the main centre for optical services provided by the Government. I hope that at some future time consideration will be given to diversification by providing a service on the north side. For many years the Royal Brisbane Hospital had an optical centre. People from the northern suburbs, particularly my own electorate and the Red· cliffe Peninsula, should be able to have eye tests taken, prescriptions issued and spectacles provided at a more convenient centre.

That is all I have to say at this stage. ! felt that I should make those observations about the possible dangers of sunglasses and ihe inconvenience suffered by people in travel­ling from the north side of the Princess Alexandra Hospital.

Hon. S. D. TOOTH (Ashgrove-Minister for Health) (3.1 p.m.), in reply: I feel that the Bill has been received by honourable members with a degree of approbation. One or two mattNs call for some reply.

Both the honourable member for Lytton and the honourable member for Sandgate made reference to sunglasses. I am not

advised that a serious danger is involved in the use of sunglasses per se. There may be a degree of risk in them if people place too much reliance upon them for protec­tion from glare. However, that is a matter not of controlling the sale of sunglasses but of educating people on the foolishness of looking into the sun-and this is where the trouble arises-on the assumption that sunglasses will protect their eyes from damage.

When an eclipse of the sun is imminent, invariably widespead advertisement is given by responsible people to the dangers of looking at the sun, even with darkened glasses, sunglasses or any other form of protection. Quite a lot of public infor­mation has been given about that subject; but of course it is impossible to protect some people against their own carelessness and foolhardiness. The best we can do is to continue to educate people not to take foolish risks with the sun. That is done very fully in schools. When I was a child, it was not done. I can remember as a child looking at the sun. Fortunately--

Mr. Jensen: They had blue glass in my day.

Mr. TOOTH: There is no doubt that in days gone by no advice was given on this matter, but I am sure that it is today­not only when an eclipse of the sun is imminent but also from time to time during health lessons in schools. I do not think it is possible to do more than that. Cer­tainly it is not possible to legislate against that sort of foolhardiness.

As the honourable member for Lytton mentioned, sunglasses do not come within the definitions of this measure. The definitions are clear. The Bill deals with optometrists and the practice of optometry. For the same reason, the subject of orthop­tics, which was mentioned by the honour­able member for Wavell, does not come within the ambit of the Bill. The discip­line of orthoptics, which may be described briefly as the technique of eye exercises designed to correct the visual axes of eyes not properly co-ordinated for binoculai" vision, does not come within the definition of "optometry" as contained in the legis­lation. The Bill will affect in no way whatsoever the work of orthoptists.

The honourable member for Wavell men­tioned that no decrease in professional stand­ards should be permitted. The purpose of the Bill is to maintain, and indeed to increase, the standards of professional ethics and the professional approach to this work.

I was glad to note that the honourable member made reference to the Queensland Institute of Technology and to the work that is being done there. The institute, in

1494 Medical Act and Other Acts, [18 OCTOBER 1974] &c., Act Amendment Bill

its many-faceted activities, has a section deal­ing with optometry which is recognised throughout Australia as being probably the best in the Commonwealth.

The honourable member for Bundaberg indulged in a very interesting dissertation on rackets. I shall take an opportunity to read his remarks very carefully and I will see if something can be done about the rackets to which he referred. He may at some time identify them for us more definitely and I will see what can be done about them.

The honourable member for Mackay requested an assurance as to the protection of country optometrists. Nothing in the Bill will remove any of the protections they cur­rently possess; he can be assured of that. He probably knows that we have made certain provisions in respect of the major suppliers of spectacles under prescription to ensure that work must be done under the super­vision of an optometrist. This in itself is an inbuilt protection to country optometrists. There has been pressure from time to time to remove that provision from the Act, but nothing of that nature is intended on this occasion.

Motion (Mr. Tooth) agreed to.

Resolution reported.

FIRST READING

Bill presented and, on motion of Mr. Tooth, read a first time.

MEDICAL ACT AND (ADMINISTRATION) MENT BILL

OTHER ACTS ACT AMEND-

INITIATION IN COMMITTEE

(The Chairman of Committees, Mr. Lickiss, Mt. Coot-tha, in the chair)

Hon. S. D. TOOTH (Ashgrove-Minister for Health) (3.9 p.m.): I move-

"That a Bill be introduced to amend the Medical Act and Other Acts (Administra­tion) Act 1966-1973 in certain particulars."

This Bill is consequent upon the Bill that has just been considered by the Committee.

This is not a lengthy Bill, and its drafting has been necessited by the introduction of the Bill relating to the qualifications and registration of optometrists, the regulation of the practice of optometry, and for purposes connected therewith.

The last-mentioned Bill includes pro­vtswns for the designation of the Board of Optometrical Registration to be altered to "The Optometrists Board of Queensland" and for the new Act being introduced to be known as the Optometrists Act 1974.

As the present designation of the board and the title of the Optometrists Acts now in force are referred to in provisions of the Medical Act and Other Acts (Administration) Acts 1966-1973, and the long title of the last-mentioned Act also refers to the title of the existing Optometrists Acts, references require to be updated, and the present Bill so provides.

The Bill also provides for a further machinery amendment necessitated by the introduction of the Optometrists Bill.

In addition, the opportunity has been taken to include a provision specifically sought by the Auditor-General to establish beyond doubt that he and his officers have the neces­sary authority to audit the accounts and associated books and records of all seven professional boards.

As the Board of Optometrical Registration is the only professional board whose govern­ing legislation is being amended in the present session of Parliament, the present Bill afforded the opportunity to introduce the authority sought by the Auditor-General, because the Medical Act and Other Acts (Administration) Act was originally enacted in order to provide for the financing of the administration of the legislation for each of the seven professional boards, and for other purposes.

The last-mentioned provision thus avoids the alternative action available which would be to introduce a separate amending Bill for each board's governing Act.

No contentious provisions are contained in the Bill, and I commend it to the Com­mittee.

Mr. BURNS (Lytton) (3.12 p.m.): The Opposition, I am sure, will have no objection to the introduction of this Bill, arising as it does from the last Bill relating to the quali­fications and registration of optometrists and the practice of optometry. I welcome the Minister's use of this Bill to establish beyond doubt the authority of the Auditor-General to audit the books and accounts of these boards.

We accept the Minister's assurance that there is nothing contentious in the Bill. If we see anything in it that requires comment, we will debate it at the second reading.

Hon. S. D. TOOTH (Ashgrove-Minister for Health) (3.13 p.m.), in reply: I thank the honourable member for his remarks.

Motion (Mr. Tooth) agreed to. Resolution reported.

FIRST READING

Bill presented and, on motion of Mr. Tooth, read a first time.

The House adjourned at 3.15 p.m.