2005 06 10 weekly - parliament.qld.gov.au · be suspended during this time and resume after 4.30...

WEEKLY HANSARDHansard Home Page: http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/hansard/

E-mail: [email protected]: (07) 3406 7314 Fax: (07) 3210 0182

51ST PARLIAMENT

CONTENTS Page

PROOF ISSN 1322-0330

Subject

Friday, 10 June 2005BEHAVIOUR OF MEMBERS ......................................................................................................................................................... 2067PETITION ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 2067PAPERS ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2067MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .......................................................................................................................................................... 2067

Morris Inquiry ...................................................................................................................................................................... 2067MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .......................................................................................................................................................... 2071

Office of the Speaker .......................................................................................................................................................... 2071MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .......................................................................................................................................................... 2071

Incorporation of Ministerial Statements .............................................................................................................................. 2071MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .......................................................................................................................................................... 2076

Morris Inquiry ...................................................................................................................................................................... 2076MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .......................................................................................................................................................... 2076

Criminal History Checks, Mature-Age Students ................................................................................................................. 2076MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .......................................................................................................................................................... 2077

BIO2005 ............................................................................................................................................................................. 2077PRIVILEGE ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 2077

Comments by Minister for Emergency Services ................................................................................................................ 2077QUESTIONS ................................................................................................................................................................................... 2077QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ................................................................................................................................................... 2078

Patel, Dr J ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2078Patel, Dr J ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2079Unemployment Rate ........................................................................................................................................................... 2079Patel, Dr J ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2080Science and Research ....................................................................................................................................................... 2081Ambulance Levy ................................................................................................................................................................. 2081Ethanol ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2082Health System .................................................................................................................................................................... 2083Brisbane City Council Budget ............................................................................................................................................. 2083

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL ............................................................................................ 2084First Reading ...................................................................................................................................................................... 2084Second Reading ................................................................................................................................................................. 2084

BY AUTHORITYL.J. OSMOND, CHIEF HANSARD REPORTER—2005

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/hansard/

Table of Contents — Friday, 10 June 2005

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL ............................................................................................2085Sitting Days and Hours; Remaining Stages; Allocation of Time Limit Order ......................................................................2085

APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL; APPROPRIATION BILL ..............................................................................................2086Second Reading (Cognate Debate) ....................................................................................................................................2086

PERSONAL EXPLANATION ..........................................................................................................................................................2099Behaviour of Members ........................................................................................................................................................2099

APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL; APPROPRIATION BILL ..............................................................................................2099Second Reading (Cognate Debate) ....................................................................................................................................2099

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL ............................................................................................2109Second Reading .................................................................................................................................................................2109Consideration in Detail ........................................................................................................................................................2125Third Reading .....................................................................................................................................................................2127

APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILL; APPROPRIATION BILL ..............................................................................................2127Second Reading (Cognate Debate) ....................................................................................................................................2127Reference to Estimates Committees ..................................................................................................................................2131

PETITION ........................................................................................................................................................................................2131SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT ............................................................................................................................................................2132ADJOURNMENT .............................................................................................................................................................................2132

Water Supply Infrastructure, Dawson River ........................................................................................................................2132Blackwater Hospital ............................................................................................................................................................2132Sunshine Coast ..................................................................................................................................................................2133Moreton Bay Region Export Awards ...................................................................................................................................2133Burnett Heads State School; School Buses .......................................................................................................................2134Trinity Lutheran College ......................................................................................................................................................2134Gladstone Show Society, Closure ......................................................................................................................................2135State Education Week, Mackay ..........................................................................................................................................2135Population Growth, Beaudesert Area .................................................................................................................................2136Bundaberg Base Hospital ...................................................................................................................................................2136Youth Parties ......................................................................................................................................................................2137

10 Jun 2005 Legislative Assembly 2067

FRIDAY, 10 JUNE 2005

Legislative Assembly

Mr ACTING SPEAKER (Hon. J Fouras, Ashgrove) read prayers and took the chair at 9.30 am.

BEHAVIOUR OF MEMBERSMr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Honourable members, a matter involving gross disrespect to one

of the temporary chairs last night has been brought to my attention this morning. I will be investigatingthis matter today and further action may be taken. In the interim, I wish to remind all members thatpersons occupying the chair are to be accorded the respect and dignity due to the chair at all times.

PETITIONThe following honourable member has lodged a paper petition for presentation—

Shingle InnMr Fraser from 1,283 petitioners requesting the House to review the removal of the Shingle Inn from the Queensland HeritageRegister, ensure that the Shingle Inn is reinstated in the Central Business District as originally as possible, as was agreed, andreinstate it on the Queensland Heritage Register ensuring that it remains protected in the future.

PAPERSMINISTERIAL PAPERS TABLED BY THE CLERKThe following ministerial papers were tabled by the Clerk—Attorney-General and Minister for Justice (Mr Welford)—• Response from the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice (Mr Welford) to an e-petition sponsored by Ms Male from

139 petitioners regarding improvements to the justice system and the legal rights for victims of crime.Minister for Natural Resources and Mines (Mr Robertson)—• Response from the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines (Mr Robertson) to a paper petition presented by Ms Stuckey

from 138 petitions regarding a suburb name change back to Tugun.Minister for Health (Mr Nuttall)—• Response from the Minister for Health (Mr Nuttall) to a paper petition presented by Mr Wilson from 1170 petitioners

requesting the House to improve maternity care services• Response from the Minister for Health (Mr Nuttall) to a paper petition presented by Ms Lee Long from 1 petitioner

requesting the House to seek a range of remedial action in respect of a decision by the Health Practitioners Tribunal tocancel the Christina Wong’s medical registration

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Morris InquiryHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.32 am): At 9 am

today I received an interim report from Mr Tony Morris QC, the Commissioner of the Bundaberg HospitalCommission of Inquiry and Deputy Commissioners, Sir Llew Edwards and Margaret Vider RN. Iwelcome the report and its 10 recommendations and I commit my government to their immediateimplementation. I table the report for the information of the House. Every member will receive a copy asprovided to me by Tony Morris, Commissioner.

When I established the inquiry in April I gave the commissioners a reporting deadline of 30September 2005. They have moved swiftly and diligently to produce an interim report less than threeweeks after the beginning of public hearings. No royal commission in the history of Queensland hasmoved as effectively or as fast as this and I thank them for it. This is further evidence of the fearlessimpartiality of this independent inquiry.

The 10 recommendations fall into three categories: legislative changes, administrative changesand recommendations relating to charges against Dr Patel and his extradition. The government fullysupports all recommendations and they will be implemented immediately. Commissioner Morris and hisdeputy commissioners are in the gallery today and, on behalf of the parliament, I want to thank them forwhat they have done.

This morning I held an extraordinary cabinet meeting to consider the interim report andapprove amendments that I will introduce to the House to give full effect to the recommendations

2068 Ministerial Statement 10 Jun 2005

without delay. As members will be aware, parliament is not scheduled to sit again until August. Giventhe importance of this issue, the government is not prepared to delay these reforms. The people ofBundaberg would expect us to get on with it, and so would the people of Queensland, and that is exactlywhat we are going to do. I will therefore seek the support of the parliament, including the opposition, theLiberal Party and Independents, to suspend standing orders later today so that this can be debated thisafternoon. I will introduce the bill after question time and offer a full briefing to the opposition, the LiberalParty and Independents at midday. I have personally rung the Leader of the Opposition and the Leaderof the Liberal Party to offer them that invitation. I offer that invitation to Independents. I simply did not gettime to call them.

Further, it is my intention to ensure that these amendments are passed today and can take effectas soon as possible. The government will therefore move that the debate and consideration of the bill belimited to two hours, from 2.30 pm until 4.30 pm this afternoon. It is proposed that debate on the budgetbe suspended during this time and resume after 4.30 pm.

Let me deal with the categories in the Morris royal commission recommendations. First islegislative changes. The proposed legislative changes target the Medical Practitioners Registration Act2001. The act governs the registration of medical practitioners and includes provisions that aim toprevent doctors or others obtaining registration fraudulently. The commissioners recommendbroadening the grounds upon which the Queensland Medical Board can cancel a doctor’s registration tocover the sorts of fraud that the Patel situation has brought to light. They recommend creating newoffences to punish people who pretend to be doctors or who practise as a doctor after they havereceived their registration from the Medical Board through false information. They recommend toughnew penalties of up to three years imprisonment for these offences. This will also apply to the offence ofgiving the Queensland Medical Board false information when applying for registration.

The bill I will introduce today implements all of the commissioners’ recommendations forlegislative change. I will do everything in my power as Premier of this state to prevent a repeat of whathappened at Bundaberg Hospital and the pain that went with it. That is why I will introducethe amendments in parliament today and I will ask parliament to make them law.

The administrative recommendations relate to the administrative process for the Minister forHealth to declare an area of need for a medical service under section 135 of the Medical PractitionersRegistration Act 2001. Section 135 enables the minister to decide that there is an area of need for amedical service if the minister considers that there are insufficient medical practitioners in the state orpart of the state to provide that service. An area of need may be a geographical area or a certainspecialisation within that area. This is relevant to the Patel situation, because temporary residentdoctors like Patel usually enter Australia to work in medical positions designated as being in an area ofneed. The commissioners say that the process to assess whether the minister should declare an area ofneed is unsatisfactory. They also believe that Queensland Health’s reliance on a nine-year-old policydocument to govern the process is nothing short of scandalous. The commissioners want a number ofchanges to the current process, with the aim of ensuring that every effort is made to fill vacancies fromwithin Australia before we resort to sourcing doctors from overseas.

I have had lengthy discussions with the Minister for Health about these matters and he hasadvised me as follows: firstly, that he will direct Queensland Health to develop a new policy immediatelythat implements the commissioners’ recommendations; secondly, that he and the Director-General ofQueensland Health will personally discuss the importance of these matters with the current holders ofministerial delegations, and, indeed, the minister and I have just met with his senior officers, includingthe Director-General of Health to discuss the implementation of these recommendations; thirdly, that hewill assess the outcomes of these discussions, including whether there is a need for new or additionaldelegates to be appointed; and, fourthly, that he and the director-general will meet with members of theOffice of the Health Practitioner Registration Boards to discuss their possible future role in exercisingsuch delegations. The Minister for Health will bring a submission to cabinet on 27 June 2005 to ensuresupport for the new policy, the outcomes of these discussion and the steps he proposes to take. TheMinister for Health will make a ministerial statement in relation to this report in a moment.

I now move to the third aspect of the recommendation—that is, charges against Patel. The reportrecommends that Patel be charged with the Criminal Code offences of making false representations andfraud. It recommends a criminal charge of a negligent act causing harm in the case of Marilyn Daisy. Itrecommends Patel be charged with the murder of James Edward Phillips or, in the alternative, unlawfulkilling—that is, manslaughter—of Mr Phillips. It recommends that the appropriate steps be taken toprocure Patel’s extradition to Australia.

A copy of the interim report was hand delivered to the office of the police commissioner at 9 amtoday. Last night I wrote to the Minister for Police and Corrective Services, Judy Spence, seeking urgentadvice about the next steps to be taken by the Queensland Police Service to pursue the extradition ofPatel and his return to Queensland. Because of its importance, I seek leave to incorporate my letter inHansard.

Leave granted.

10 Jun 2005 Ministerial Statement 2069

QueenslandGovernmentPremier of Queensland and Minister for TradeThe Honourable Judy Spence MPMinister for Police and Corrective ServicesP 0 Box 15195CITY EAST Q 4002Dear JudyThe Commissioner of the Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry, Anthony Morris QC has tonight publicly announced that hewill deliver an interim report about his findings to me tomorrow morning at 9 am.Please provide to me as a matter of urgency advice about the next steps to be taken by the Queensland Police Service to pursuethe extradition of Dr Patel and his return to Queensland. If Commissioner Morris’ interim report should contain any information thatprovides evidence for possible charges against Dr Patel, I would like the police service to be in a position to take immediate action.As I have indicated to you in previous correspondence and in our joint press conference of 4 June 2005 I am keen to do what everit takes to bring Dr Patel back to Queensland.I look forward to your advice in regard to this matter.Yours sincerely(sgd)PETER BEATTIE MPPREMIER AND MINISTER FOR TRADE

Mr BEATTIE: I also said that if the interim report contained evidence regarding possible chargesagainst Patel, I would like the police to take immediate action. I thank the minister for her speedyresponse. I received a letter last night from Judy Spence which says as follows—Further to your correspondence of earlier today and to our conversations with the Police Commissioner on 4 June 2005, regardingthe Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry, the Queensland Police Service is ready to pursue possible charges andcommence the processes necessary for the potential extradition of Dr Patel. The Police Commissioner has advised me—

that is the police minister—that the Queensland Police Service has been actively advancing the Patel investigation. These actions include:• Forming an investigative team from the Homicide Squad and Bundaberg Criminal Investigation Branch consisting of five

detectives. This will be increased if necessary. • Ongoing cooperation with the State Coroner on a number of files relating to patients of Dr Patel. • Forming a Medical Tribunal to assist in gathering medical evidence. This Tribunal will consist of two senior surgeons and

one senior anaesthetist.• Locating Dr Patel. As you have stated and to which I agree, the vital issue is acquiring the necessary evidence to support potential charges and anextradition application for Dr Patel.

The minister goes on—I understand that the Queensland Police Service has not yet received any evidentiary material from Commissioner Tony Morris.The Police Commissioner will pursue this matter with Mr Morris on Friday the 10th of June 2005.

My letter was written after the news release was issued by Tony Morris yesterday. The responsecame last night. As I have indicated, the commissioner will now have a copy of this report. The ministergoes on to state—Fundamentally, the Queensland Police Service will now: • Interview the surgical, medical and nursing staff involved in the operations conducted by Dr Patel.• Refer all the available medical evidence to the Tribunal. • Obtain other necessary evidentiary material. • Complete a full brief of evidence. • Obtain the advice of the Director of Public Prosecutions. • Commence the prescribed requirements for extradition. As you are aware, police require the strongest possible brief of evidence. As was announced by the Police Commissioner at ourpress conference on 4 June 2005, police would prefer to pursue the strongest 3 to 5 cases at this stage against Dr Patel. As we discussed, the Police Commissioner has informed me that the QPS are poised to act quickly on any reference of chargesrecommended by Tony Morris and the QPS will progress these matters as quickly as possible. Judy Spence Minister for Police and Corrective Services

I table that letter from the minister. Again I would refer members to its information. I thank theminister for her support.

I also thank Commissioner Morris and Deputy Commissioners Edwards and Vider for their speedand independence. Their diligence in providing the government with early recommendations is a hugeservice to the people of Bundaberg and Queensland. I will continue to do whatever I can to assist theinquiry. That includes meeting with Commissioner Morris should he find that useful.


This inquiry is about finding what is wrong with the health system and then fixing it. I will not havethe commissioner criticised for meeting with me to ensure that my government is in a position to takeswift action where this is required. It is in the interest of the people of Queensland. When we met onWednesday afternoon, the commissioner left me with draft recommendations which enabled us to getready for the release of the interim report today.

I stress again: this is about fixing the health system. Today we take an important step in thatdirection. I understand that my proposal for urgent parliamentary consideration of these amendments isunusual. However, I would hope that the opposition supports my view about the urgency of theselegislative measures. The circumstances demand bipartisan action and I look forward to the unanimoussupport of the parliament.

It is very important that I agree to meet with Mr Morris from time to time for updates on his workbecause it has so much potential impact on Queenslanders. We will seriously consider implementing allof the recommendations that he makes in any of his reports because I know that he is not only fiercelyindependent but also totally determined to find solutions to the issues that caused the Dr Patelproblems. As I said, I will not allow anyone to stand in the way of my government making the necessaryreforms to the system. We owe it to the patients in Bundaberg to do this and to do it as quickly aspossible.

I do want to highlight the importance of meeting that I had with Mr Morris. When recommending acriminal prosecution, which the commission has done, and especially one which involves extradition,one does not announce one’s intentions so that the bird can fly the coop. The commissioner, Mr Morris,had to meet with me to put arrangements in place before the interim report was published. That is why Iwrote to the police minister last night.

Under the Order in Council setting up the Bundaberg Hospital inquiry the Premier is the onlyappropriate contact in government for Commissioner Morris. Those Executive Council decisions state atministerial direction 6—The honourable the Premier and Minister for Trade is to give the necessary direction herein accordingly.

The Order in Council for the Fitzgerald inquiry and most other inquiries has been in exactly thesame terms. Naturally Tony Morris informed me of these issues which the interim report would coverand provided me with a draft. Otherwise, the meeting would have been pointless. Following the meetingbetween Tony Morris and me I authorised Tony Morris to communicate with the Queensland PoliceService to start the ball rolling and he did that. If there have been any leaks in relation to this matter, thatis a matter for others to consider.

It had originally been suggested that Mr Morris enter the Executive Building through the backdoor for our meeting. Both Mr Morris and I felt that this was unseemly and inappropriate. Mr Morris tookthe view that if he was spotted sneaking into the building, hiding around corners and lurking in theshadows it would create an impression that either he or I had something to hide. Accordingly, bothMr Morris and I agreed that, as the meeting was essential and as neither of us had anything to hide, theappropriate course was to let the media know that the meeting was taking place and do it in an openand transparent way.

Regarding the venue of the meeting, as the commission of inquiry is not sitting this week butparliament is it was mutually convenient to meet at the Executive Building, part way. Both Mr Morris andI are more interested in getting things done than in meeting expectations that some others may havewhich are not in the interests of getting things done. In fact, for this morning’s hand over of the report Idid offer to come to the commission of inquiry’s offices at the Magistrates Court building, but there wereobviously problems with this. Firstly, the inquiry courtroom is in use by the Magistrates Court this week.Secondly, any public event in that building would have to have been cleared with the Chief Magistrate,Judge Irwin, who is lending facilities to the inquiry. Thirdly, parliament is sitting this morning and it wouldhave been untimely for me to be at the other end of town. Mr Morris suggested the old LegislativeCouncil chamber as a suitable neutral venue being where, for example, the Governor opens parliament.

I wanted to deal with those issues because I do not want any nonsense that will distract us fromresolving these matters. Finally, I have asked my office to distribute to members of the House a tablethat went to cabinet this morning. It is a comparison of existing offences in the act and new offencesunder the bill. I am doing that so that members will be better informed when the debate comes up thisafternoon. It is one piece of paper. It will give members better information about how to proceed with thisdebate. I thank honourable members for their attention on this matter. As I have said, I am absolutelydetermined that we will do everything we can to fix this problem.



Office of the SpeakerHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.48 am): I table a

copy of a report by the Speaker on trips undertaken to: the United Kingdom and Singapore from 3September to 26 September 2004; Singapore from the 7 to 11 June 2004; and Thailand from 28January to 3 February 2003. This is the material supplied to me by the Speaker at my request.

I table a letter I wrote to the Speaker on 30 May 2005 asking for an urgent detailed report on hisoverseas trips, on the basis that I wanted to assess the public value of his travel and would welcomehim seeking my approval for trips that did not have my prior approval. The Deputy Premier and Isubsequently met with the Speaker. This week I promised I would table the Speaker’s report and now Ideliver on that commitment.

In view of the fact that the Director of Public Prosecutions has not made a determination onmatters referred to that office by the Crime and Misconduct Commission, I am concerned that anydetermination as to whether or not to approve the Speaker’s travel could be prejudicial to the DPP’sdetermination. I am concerned about that. I have consulted with the Clerk. I share his view that the testin determining whether approval should be given, or whether reimbursement is required, is whether theexpenditure was primarily for an official purpose—Speaker or Parliamentary Service related issues orother official purpose—and in all of the circumstances reasonable. I have now, as I promised, tabled thereports from the Speaker. As soon as the DPP has made a determination, I will apply this test and makean appropriate recommendation.


Incorporation of Ministerial StatementsHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.49 am): On other

matters, I indicate to the House that on Tuesday next week I will leave for a Smart State trade,biotechnology and investment mission to the United States and Italy. I also want to report on tradeperformance for the March 2005 quarter, Exercise Orchard Alert, give the House an update on nursepractitioners, and ammonium nitrate. I also want to report on the community cabinet to be held on theGold Coast on Sunday, 10 July, and Monday, 11 July. I report to the House in relation to the latest figureson waiting times. I also want to report to the House on the Queensland Week business lunch today andReconciliation Awards for Business. I also want to report on Vivian Solon. Mr Acting Speaker, with yourapproval, I seek leave to have all of those ministerial statements incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.BIO2005On Tuesday next week I will lead a Smart State trade, biotechnology and investment mission to the United States and Italy.More than 80 biotechnology and business leaders will join me for various sections of the mission.The main focus of the mission will be to attend BIO 2005 in Philadelphia in order to advance the Smart State’s position as abiotechnology hub.BIO 2005 is the largest international biotechnology convention and exhibition in the world and members of my mission and I will betalking to as many people as possible among the 20,000 industry leaders, scientists, policy makers and academics from all areasof the life sciences industry.We will focus on:• Queensland’s biodiversity, • the exciting research being carried out in Queensland, • the Smart State companies exhibiting at BIO 2005 • the cutting-edge, biotechnology-related facilities we have built in the Smart State as part of the $2.4 billion we have

invested in innovation, science and research since 1998 and the $473 million being spent over the next four years;• opportunities to enter into partnerships and co-operation with Queensland enterprises;• the fact that Queensland is an ideal location for international companies to establish a headquarters or Asia-Pacific office;• the opportunities for investing in Smart State biotech ventures.I will also be seeking to increase Queensland exports of goods and services to the USA and Italy, especially in the areas oftourism, creative industries, food and education.While much of the mission will involve new industries, I will also be promoting our traditional industries such as coal.There will be important meetings in the United States regarding the development of clean coal technology and the prospects forconstruction of coal-fired power plants which don’t contribute to global climate change.And in Italy I will talk to the major users of coal about Queensland’s clean coal, the clean coal technology and the way we areincreasing our capacity to export more coal.I thank all the companies who are accompanying me because they are obviously keen to export and expand.


Trade MissionsThe latest export results demonstrate that the Government’s five year Trade Strategy Export Solutions, launched in October 2001,continues to deliver excellent results for Queensland. In the 2005 January-March quarter, an additional 71 new exporters were added to the list of exporters. The number of new exporters since commencing the Strategy in 2001 was 512 at the end of May.These 512 new exporters have contributed an extra $690 million to the Queensland economy. My department has undertaken a range of strategic projects to assist Queensland companies to export. In the January-March quarter alone, these strategic projects generated approximately $55 million in confirmed export sales. Some examples of our achievements in the January- March quarter include: In India, a Queensland company signed a contract with Taj Hotels to provide water-saving systems for 10 hotels worth $160,000.In China, SIMTARS announced sales of 2 gas chronometers to China, totalling $90,000. SIMTARS will receive a deposit of$100,000 as part of a deal for a further 14 chronometers valued at $1 million. In the Middle East, a Queensland company has won a $6 million landscaping contract for a palace in Abu Dhabi.Gold Coast based Sunland Group and its joint venture partner Emirates Investments Group have made an early start on their$920 million Versace resort in Dubai with construction to begin in early 2006 with opportunities to emerge for Queenslandsuppliers. One of our marine companies has reported sales of $1 million in Dubai as a direct result of the marine trade mission led by mydepartment. In the UK market, one of our companies which took part in the Queensland Government medical devices market research project,has generated exports to date valued at approximately $121,000.80% of my department’s current strategic projects are focused on increasing export sales of knowledge intensive goods andservices. Not only are more jobs being achieved, but “smart” jobs consistent with our Smart State strategy.The January-March quarter results show the continuing strength and diversification of Queensland’s export performance.

Counter-TerrorismIn July, Queensland is hosting a counter-terrorism exercise in conjunction with the Australian Government as part of the NationalCounter-Terrorism Committee exercise program. Queensland’s efforts are focused on preventing an attack. But we also need to have the capability to respond and deal with the consequences of a terrorist incident, should it occur.Exercise Orchid Alert demonstrates my Government’s proactive approach to the threat of terrorism by further enhancing our abilityto prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism. Exercise Orchid Alert has involved over six months of planning and will involve more than 20 Queensland and AustralianGovernment agencies.The exercise program will incorporate a number of different activities including a deployment phase on 19-20 July, where agencieswill practise their ability to respond in the field to a devised scenario. There are 5 supporting activities which allow agencies to practise specialist skills such as those required in situations involvingUrban Search and Rescue, Dignitary Protection and Forensic capabilities. There are 6 discussion exercises which provide a forum for organisations to play out their planned responses to scenarios in around table discussion. Themes across the exercise include the issues of communication and cooperation. We understand that managing the consequence of an actual terrorist act will involve a wide range of local, State and AustralianGovernment agencies and non-Government agencies. By involving agencies from these sectors in this exercise we will improve our ability to work together and strengthen ourcollaboration with other key stakeholders. Queensland is committed to the continual enhancement of its counter-terrorism arrangements and capabilities. We will continue to test our arrangements every two years in line with the national exercise program.

Nurse Practitioners The significant challenges facing our health system call for new ways of thinking and working. This must involve more flexible roles for our health professionals, including nurses, and over recent years we’ve seen theexpansion of the nursing role to include advance practice nurses and now nurse practitioners. The success of nurse practitioner trials that began in Queensland in July 2002 prompted the government to extend the trials.The current 12 month round of demonstration projects commenced between January and March this year, in the following areas:• QEII Hospital;• Southern Downs;• Charleville;• Redcliffe-Caboolture;• The Prince Charles Hospital; and• Townsville.


The government is now looking at ways to fast-track the introduction of nurse practitioners, and we expect to see significantprogress within the next 12 months.The Queensland State Steering Committee on Nurse Practitioners is overseeing the development and implementation of thenurse practitioner model in Queensland. We are working with nurses and other professionals to put in place the training, legislation and co-operation between professionsthat are prerequisites for the safety and success of nurse practitioners. Given the importance of this issue for the future of health services in Queensland, I will update the House on progress.Expert PanelsThe Queensland Nursing Council is establishing and training expert panels to assess applications from nurses to become nursepractitioners. These panels are expected to be operational after October 2005. Until Queensland universities are able to offer accredited nurse practitioner programs, the Queensland Nursing Council isproposing a three year grandfather arrangement, whereby nurses who have obtained a Masters Degree in Nursing or a relateddiscipline may apply to become a nurse practitioner. In 2006, Queensland universities will begin offering formal masters level curricula.Four universities are preparing applications for course accreditation with the Queensland Nursing Council namely.They are Queensland University of Technology, Australian Catholic University, the University of Queensland, and the University ofSouthern Queensland. Legislative ReformThe Health (Drugs and Poisons) Regulation has recently been amended to allow nurse practitioners (as endorsed by theQueensland Nursing Council) to prescribe medications according to a Drug Therapy Protocol. The Queensland Nurse Practitioner Drug Therapy Protocol is being developed with extensive consultation with stakeholders.It is expected to be finalised and approved by the end of July 2005. Queensland Health is investigating other amendments to allow nurses to request radiology tests (under the Radiation SafetyRegulation 1999) and provide workers’ compensation certificates to patients (under the Workers’ Compensation andRehabilitation Act 2003). Professional Accountability The success of the nurse practitioner model hinges on medical, nursing, and allied health professionals agreeing on who doeswhat, when and who is accountable for clinical decisions. Quality and safety are paramount, and there must be agreement on the circumstances in which a nurse practitioner makes aclinical decision independent of a medical practitioner. This is being progressed through development of the Health Management Protocols and through the Queensland State SteeringCommittee on Nurse Practitioners.The Australian Medical Association (Qld) has indicated its “in principle” support for the introduction of nurse practitioners in acollaborative role with other health professionals. The AMA is on the Queensland State Steering Committee, which also includes the Queensland Divisions of General Practice; theRural Doctors’ Association; Queensland Nursing Council; the Queensland Nurses Union; as well as the Queensland Health zonalrepresentatives and the Principal Nursing, Allied Health and Medical Advisors to Queensland Health.It has links with the specialist interests of pharmacy and radiology through the Principal Allied Health Adviser as well as the DrugTherapy Protocol Committee.District Committees are responsible for the development of health management protocols, which also draw in specialistrepresentation as required. By the end of this year, the State Steering Committee will have produced an Implementation Framework including:• whether the current level and mix of health services supports implementation of a nurse practitioner model; and• the availability of multi-disciplinary clinical support and supervision.National Consistency Nurse practitioners are working in other parts of Australia, but we need nationally consistent standards. The National Nursing and Nursing Education Taskforce (comprised of Australia’s leading nursing, nursing education, and trainingspecialists) is developing a comprehensive national strategy and is due to report to the Australian Health Ministers’ AdvisoryCouncil by May 2006.This report will inform the Queensland Steering Committee on Nurse Practitioners.

COAGMr Acting Speaker—You will recall that at the COAG meeting in June 2004, we agreed to limit access to security sensitive ammonium nitrate to onlythose people who could establish they had a legitimate need to use it.At that meeting, we also agreed that by 1 November 2004, all jurisdictions would endeavour to have in place legislativearrangements for a licensing regime to regulate security sensitive ammonium nitrate.Queensland played a lead role in the development of the nationally consistent regime and was the first Australian government toimplement its licensing regime. In fact, Queensland is the only jurisdiction to meet the COAG deadline of 1 November 2004.


On 1 November 2004, the Queensland Government declared security sensitive ammonium nitrate as an explosive andcommenced regulating it through licensing arrangements under the Explosives Act 1999. A nationally agreed transition period was put in place to allow users and stakeholders to become compliant. This transition periodwill cease in Queensland on 30 June 2005 as agreed.Queensland’s licensing system is fully operational and the required security checking procedures are now in place.However, I understand Mr Acting Speaker, that the other States and Territories are still in the process of finalising their licensingregimes.The Explosives Inspectorate of the Department of Natural Resources and Mines has been working closely and collaboratively withall stakeholders in the ammonium nitrate supply chain.This collaboration is essential to ensure that the compliance process is as smooth as possible and that the impact on day to dayoperations is minimised.The Explosives Inspectorate has undertaken an extensive range of communications and awareness raising activities.Presentations and workshops have been held in a number of locations statewide including Mareeba, Brisbane, Rockhampton andMackay, with further workshops planned for Toowoomba, Quilpie, Emerald, Bundaberg, Townsville, Cairns and Mount Isa.A number of new licence applications, and applications for licence amendments from existing explosives licence holders, are nowbeing received by the Explosives Inspectorate.Currently, about 1400 existing explosives licence holders can use security sensitive ammonium nitrate, and the ExplosivesInspectorate has been fielding up to 30 licence queries per day from Queenslanders.There is also anecdotal evidence from the Inspectorate that some primary producers are moving to alternative products for use ontheir crops, in preference to ammonium nitrate.As 30 June 2005 is fast approaching, I would encourage all Queenslanders who require a licence for security sensitive ammoniumnitrate to apply as soon as possible.Mr Acting Speaker, it is a sad fact of life that measures such as these are now required to prevent the misuse of ammonium nitrateproducts. However, our regulatory regime will limit the scope for its abuse in Queensland, making our community safer.

Community Cabinet, Gold CoastMr Acting Speaker .. Cabinet is again to meet on the Gold Coast.It will be our fifth Community Cabinet of the year and the 84th since election in 1998.It will be on Sunday July 10 and Monday July 11. As I have said before—we will meet with, listen to and respond to Queenslanders wherever they live and work.It is all about us listening—and by continuing to keep in touch—by going to the people and listening to them on their turf and ontheir terms.This is the ideal opportunity for Coast residents to again meet first-hand with the State’s key decision-makers.The two-day gathering allows people to meet me, the Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries and Directors-General, but it will alsoallow the region to highlight its successes.Cabinet last met on the Gold Coast on 28 June 2004. Informal Community Cabinet proceedings will occur on Sunday 10 July from 1.30pm to 3.30pm, at the Sports Hall, Pacific PinesState High School, Santa Isobel Boulevard, Gaven.Formal deputations will follow at the Sports Hall from 3.30pm to 5pm that day.On Monday 11 July, Cabinet will meet from 9.30am at the Gold Coast Convention Centre, Cnr Gold Coast Highway and T EPeters Drive, Broadbeach.Deputations can be booked by filling out request forms from:1. Electorate Office, Member for Gaven, Robert Poole MP, Suite 6, Maid of Sker Building, 39—41 Nerang Street, Nerang,

Qld, 4211. Phone 5502 1411 Fax 5502 1433;2. Electorate Office, Member for Albert, the Hon Margaret Keech MP, 2 Rochester Drive, Mt Warren Park, Qld, 4207. Phone

3807 0809. Fax 3807 6296;3. Electorate Office, Member for Broadwater, Peta-Kaye Croft MP, Suite 17, Runaway Bay Marina, 247 Bayview Street,

Runaway Bay, Qld, 4216. Phone 5529 6000. Fax 5529 6070;4. Electorate Office, Member for Burleigh, Christine Smith MP, 1 Paradise Avenue, Miami, Qld, 4220. Phone 5526 6024. Fax

5526 6135;5. Electorate Office, Member for Mudgeeraba, Dianne Reilly MP, Mudgeeraba Professional Centre, Swan Lane,

Mudgeeraba, Qld, 4213. Phone 5569 0482. Fax 5569 0675;6. Electorate Office, Member for Southport, Peter Lawlor MP, Shop 2, 24 Musgrave Avenue, Chirn Park, Qld, 4215. Phone

5532 5068. Fax 5532 0394;7. Cabinet Secretariat on 1800 448 377 or 1800 448 378;8. Council Chambers, Gold Coast City Council, Nerang-Southport Road, Nerang, Qld, 4211. Phone 5582 8211. Fax 5596

3653.Deputation request forms must be received by noon on Wednesday 29 June 2005.Cabinet has in the past 12 months met at: Innisfail, the Ekka, Queensland Art Gallery, the Whitsundays, Brisbane ConventionCentre (Ausbiotech), Caboolture, Charleville, Ipswich, the University of Queensland (Smart Queensland launch) and Kawana.


Hospital Waiting ListsFederal Government statistics for elective surgery show that Queensland has the shortest waiting times in Australia.The Opposition has conned some gullible sections of the media into believing these official figures have been fudged.The Opposition says the waiting times are shortest because people can’t get on the waiting lists and that it takes ages to get onthe lists.Proof that this is a con comes from these same official Federal Government figures which show that there were more hospitaladmissions for every 1,000 of the population in Queensland than anywhere else.In other words—not only are our waiting times the shortest but we are admitting more patients into our hospitals for treatment thananyone else.I am delighted that these official figures prove once again that doctors and nurses working in Queensland Health’s public hospitalsprovided the best results in the country.Queenslanders can see for themselves on the internet if they go to the web site of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfarereport on Australian Hospital Statistics 2003-04 and go to table 6.2 on page 120.It is a table of waiting times for all states and territories.As I have repeatedly said, there are problems in the health system which will be fixed by the Morris Inquiry and the Forster Reviewbut we should not lose sight of the fact that there are thousands of people working in Queensland Health who are providing awonderful service to Queenslanders.Waiting times are taken for the number of days patients have had to wait when 50 per cent and 90 per cent of those waiting areadmitted.The average for Queensland for the 50% mark was 22 days, compared with 27 in Victoria and Western Australia and 46 in theACT—and an Australian average of 28.The average for Queensland for the 90% mark was 115 compared with the next best of 175 in Victoria, a high of 373 in the ACTand an Australian average of 193.Only 2.8 per cent of Queenslanders waited longer than a year for surgery, compared with the next best of 3.3 in Victoria, a high of10.4 in the ACT and an Australian average of 3.9.

Reconciliation AwardsToday I will declare open the 2005 Reconciliation Awards for Business open for nominations at the Queensland Week BusinessLunch.Now in their third year, the Reconciliation Awards for Business provide an excellent opportunity to showcase the positive benefitsof reconciliation and acknowledge the great work of Queensland businesses who are striving for a better and smarter future.These awards are a great way to recognise Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous individuals, employers andorganisations promoting cross-cultural awareness and progressing reconciliation in Queensland.My Government recognises and acknowledges the disadvantages that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have had toendure as a result of past Government policies. That’s why my Government is working in a range of ways to see that all Queenslanders have the same opportunities inemployment, education and a fairer future in the Smart State. The Reconciliation Awards for Business are part of our plan. The calibre of nominations in 2004 was outstanding and testament to the excellent cross cultural partnerships established acrossour Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous communities.2004 winners of the Reconciliation Awards for Business included; Jim Ralph Employment Consultancy in Ipswich, Paronella Parkand the Baddagun Aboriginal Corporation, Walker Family Tours in the Daintree and the North Queensland Gas Pipeline Project. In 2005 Awards are offered in the following categories:• Emerging business • Employment• Joint venturesAwards will be judged by a panel of business, industry and public sector representatives and nominations close on Monday 18July 2005. Winners will be announced at a ceremony at Parliament House in September. The Reconciliation Awards for Business demonstrate the commitment of the Queensland Government, and Queenslanders,towards reconciliation. I encourage all Queensland businesses that are making a difference to nominate for an AwardMore information on the Awards and nomination forms are available at www.reconciliation.qld.gov.au

Vivian SolonRepresentatives of Vivian Solon issued a media release last night thanking the Queensland Government for establishing a centralcontact point for Ms Solon in Queensland to ensure available assistance is coordinated. The release acknowledged my government is committed to providing assistance to Ms Solon to help her resettle and willcommence investigations into avenues of assistance for her.In the release, Mr George Newhouse said “We contacted the Queensland Government today and were surprised how quickly theyreacted to our request.“Dealing with the State Government of Queensland and the Federal Government was like chalk and cheese.Mr Newhouse went on to say “The Federal Government is nitpicking and point-scoring without considering the outcomes for awheelchair bound woman.”Vivian is not only wheelchair bound, she also has difficulty manipulating her hands. She requires constant personal and medicalattention and care. She does not own even the most basic household items.


Vivian is keen to come home to Australia, but she needs proper facilities and care. My Government will do whatever we can to assist, but it really is up to the Federal Government now to respond to her requests forhelp.According to the media release, Vivian’s representatives are disappointed that the Howard Government has still not properlyaddressed: • Vivian’s continuing need for a carer;• Reuniting Vivian with her children;• Vivian’s travel arrangements and visas to allow family members to accompany her; • Some money for Vivian to live on; and• Vivian’s continuing accommodation needs.Senator Kay Patterson responded last night with a media release in which she said the Commonwealth had agreed to pay Vivian’sairfares, but accuses Vivian of not yet saying when she wants to return.Senator Patterson went on to accuse Vivian of having failed so far to accept the assistance package the Commonwealth hasoffered.I don’t know whether what Senator Patterson said is correct, but I do know that Vivian Solon has been through a tragedy throughno fault of her own and deserves better.


Morris InquiryHon. GR NUTTALL (Sandgate—ALP) (Minister for Health) (9.50 am): It is imperative that my

department manages Queensland’s medical work force to the highest possible standards.Commissioner Morris has found that this has not been happening in a number of key areas and, as thePremier has already indicated, it will be fixed. Section 135 of the Medical Practitioners Registration Act2001 is a very important piece of legislation. It enables the minister, or a holder of a ministerialdelegation, to determine an area of need for a medical service if it is considered that there areinsufficient medical practitioners in the state, or part of the state, to provide that service. This is howPatel came to Queensland.

As we all now know, temporary resident doctors usually enter the country to work in an area ofneed. It is vital that we get the administrative process for declaring areas of need right. Clearly, relyingon a nine-year-old policy document is simply not good enough. Again, it will be fixed. This morning Ihave directed my department to immediately develop a new policy that implements in full thecommissioner’s recommendations. As a matter of urgency, I will be discussing with the director-generalof my department the serious responsibilities that come with ministerial delegations. I will be seekingassurance that those responsibilities are understood and asking whether we need to look at otherarrangements to get this policy right.

As a matter of urgency, the director-general and I will meet with the Office of the HealthPractitioner Registration Boards to discuss its possible future role in exercising these importantdelegations. We will fix the problems identified in the interim report. I will bring a submission to cabineton 27 June and over the next couple of weeks we will do whatever it takes to get the policy in thisimportant area right and deliver on the commissioner’s recommendations.


Criminal History Checks, Mature-Age StudentsHon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Minister for Education and the Arts) (9.52 am): The

Queensland government is committed to keeping our school students safe from the threat of sexualpredators and any criminal element in our schoolyards. That is why in January this year weimplemented new legislation requiring the criminal history checking of mature-age students seeking toenrol in our state high schools. Today I am pleased to announce to the House that the system isworking. Between January and May the department, in close consultation with the Queensland PoliceService, has received and considered 971 applications from mature-age students. Of these, 949mature-age applicants have been issued with positive notices, meaning that they have been found to besuitable to enrol in our state schools. Some 13 are still being processed, eight have been issued withnegative notices and one has been asked to show cause as to why enrolment would not be harmful.

These eight mature-age applicants who have been issued with negative notices have been foundto be unfit to continue their education in the company of schoolchildren. This means that they are unableto enrol in state schools other than the School of Distance Education. These eight applicants were foundto have had significant criminal histories, ranging from recent drug offences to violent robberies toassaults, and are naturally unsuitable people to be present on high school campuses. What this showsus is a system that works in the best interests of Queensland adolescents and teenagers and goes along way to keeping them protected from potential harm while they are at school.

10 Jun 2005 Questions 2077

We know the potential for harm and for criminal influence from a mature, street-wise person witha history of drug use or violence if that person was able to infiltrate a high school. However, that is not tosay that we are denying an education to any mature-age student who wants to return to the educationsystem—far from it. If applicants issued with negative notices through this system are determined tocontinue with their education, they are entitled to enrol with the School of Distance Education and not besubject to these checks.

Furthermore, this system is not intended to discourage mature-age students from furthering theireducation. In fact, of the 971 applications received during the last five months, 186 applicants werefound to actually have a criminal history. But these offences were either extremely minor—trafficoffences, for example—or perhaps dated back many years. Of those 186 applicants, only the eight Imentioned earlier were issued negative notices. People who may have committed an offence when theywere younger or have been found guilty of a minor crime deserve a second chance, and we encourageall mature-age applicants who want to go back to school to make an application.

Departmental officers use discretion and take into consideration the nature of the conviction orcharge, the time when the offence was committed and other matters such as the applicant’s intendedmode of attendance at the school. I am sure that my colleagues will agree that the protection of ourstudents across the education system is vital, and criminal history checking is a fundamental part of that.


BIO2005Hon. T McGRADY (Mount Isa—ALP) (Minister for State Development and Innovation) (9.55 am):

In just over one week’s time, the strength and diversity of Queensland’s biotechnology sector will beshown at the world’s biggest biotechnology conference, BIO2005, in Philadelphia. The Premier and I willbe very proud to lead a 76-member delegation representing some of the state’s leading biotechcompanies, universities and research and commercialisation bodies. BIO2005 is a very importantproject for the Queensland economy. Having a strong presence in Philadelphia will enable one ofQueensland’s fastest growing industries to pursue new business and investment opportunities fromaround the world. This will create new export markets for Queensland and more jobs for Queenslandersworking in the biotech sector and related industries.

Let us take a look at what happened last year. Industry has estimated that our involvement inBIO2004 will generate more than $33 million for Queensland over two years. The state governmentplans to go all out this year to attract even more international interest in our state. We will make anumber of exciting announcements, including the details of a new biotech strategic plan for Queenslandas well as a host of initiatives to bring global firms to the Smart State. This adds up to a very excitingthree days between 19 and 22 June. I look forward to bringing members news of BIO2005 and the manybenefits it will bring to our state.

PRIVILEGE

Comments by Minister for Emergency ServicesMr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, on 16 May 2005 the Deputy Leader of the

Opposition and member for Callide wrote to me alleging that the Hon. Chris Cummins MP, Minister forEmergency Services, deliberately misled the House in his response tabled on 22 March 2005 toquestion on notice No. 345. In particular, the member referred to the reason given by the minister fordelays in the construction of a new ambulance station at Emu Park. The member also referred tosubsequent comments attributed to the minister that appeared seven weeks later in the 13 May 2005edition of the Morning Bulletin. These comments suggest a further reason for the existence of a furtherreason for the delay in the project. I am unaware of the accuracy of the comments in the MorningBulletin attributed to the minister. However, the comments do not in themselves establish that theminister’s response to question on notice No. 345 in March was incorrect or misleading. I find that thereis no basis to demonstrate a prima facie contempt of deliberately misleading the House and intend totake no further action in respect of this matter.

QUESTIONSMr ACTING SPEAKER: Honourable members, I believe it is important that I make a few

observations to the House about questions, both on notice and without notice. Standing order 115clearly outlines the general rules applying to both types of questions. The standing ordersprovide, amongst other things, that questions shall be brief and related to one issue, shall not containarguments, inferences or imputations or ask for opinions. In recent days I have made comment about

2078 Questions Without Notice 10 Jun 2005

needless preambles in questions without notice. I note that this problem also occurs in questions onnotice. I am also becoming concerned at the number of parts or subquestions in questions. I would urgeall members to take the time to read standing order 115 and frame their questions more carefully, havingregard to the rules.

I also advise that the clerks at the table are able to assist members with the drafting of questionsto ensure that they are in order. In relation to answers to questions, I note recent correspondence frommembers of the opposition essentially complaining about the quality of answers and allegedunparliamentary language, imputations or personal reflections in answers to questions.

In relation to answers to both types of questions, I advise as follows. The general rules ofprocedure apply to answers. Therefore, answers should not contain matters that would not be allowed inthe House generally. For example, unparliamentary language, imputations or personal reflectionsoffending standing order 234 are not permitted in answers. Answers that offend the rules may be ruledout of order. However, apart from that, it is a longstanding rule of practice and procedure in our Housethat the answer to a question is a matter for the minister. The Speaker cannot intervene to improve thequality of an answer or force the minister to answer the question in the way that members asking wouldprefer. If a minister does not answer the question to a member’s satisfaction, the member can either askfurther questions on the topic or make whatever comment in debate or elsewhere they believe isappropriate given the answer.

In conclusion, I remind all members that questions are a vital part of parliament’s proceedings,especially to its scrutiny function, and it is important that both members asking questions and ministersanswering questions observe not only the rules but also the spirit of such proceedings.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Patel, Dr JMr SPRINGBORG (10.01 am): I refer the Premier to his cruel speculation regarding web access

from Oregon to the Dr Patel letter, which he has claimed may have been from Labor’s ‘Dr Death’himself. Despite the Premier’s desperate attempt at distraction and spin, why is it that with all theresources of the Police Service and the Premier’s government at his disposal it was the opposition thathas been able to confirm that the access was actually by a Dr Russ Faria, a family physician fromOregon who read about Labor’s ‘Dr Death’ in the headlines of the Portland Oregonian and hasconfirmed with the opposition his access of 1 June and also in the latter part of May? Given that thePremier’s government paid for Dr Patel to escape in the first place, just how hard has the Premier reallybeen looking for Labor’s ‘Dr Death’?

Mr BEATTIE: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question and say that I am delightedthat he has advised the House of that. It proves that putting the letter on the web site worked. It sent amessage to the world that Patel is not a suitable doctor. It sent a message to the world that anyone whois involved in the medical fraternity should not have anything to do with him. I am delighted that a doctorfrom Oregon, which is where Dr Patel has a home, has noted that Dr Patel is not a person with whom heshould share his medical practice.

Putting the letter on the web site worked. I am delighted that the opposition has come in here andconfirmed that the government’s strategy has worked. I want to make sure that Dr Patel never works asa doctor ever again anywhere in the world. That is what I want to see. How do we do that? We tell theworld via the net. It is fantastic that a doctor from Oregon is out there doing that. So I thank the Leaderof the Opposition. Well done!

Mr SPRINGBORG: I rise to a point of order. He actually confirmed all this on springborg.com.au.,not on the Premier’s web site.

Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The Leader of the Opposition knowsthat that is not a point of order. This is the fourth day of sittings. I warn members that I am not going toallow frivolous points of order.

Mr BEATTIE: The reality is that what the Leader of the Opposition has done today has justconfirmed that the government’s strategy is working. I think that is fantastic. I said that we would send amessage to the world and we have sent a message to the world. The important thing is that the world islistening.

Mr Schwarten: He wanted to keep it quiet.Mr BEATTIE: That is right. The good thing about this is that it is not me saying that the world is

listening; the Leader of the Opposition is saying that. I have to say that is the sort of bipartisan support Ilike.

I want to put it on the record today that I am gratified by the detective work undertaken by theLeader of the Opposition. All I can say is: good on you, digger. That is absolutely fantastic. Thank youfor confirming to the House that the government’s strategy is working.

10 Jun 2005 Questions Without Notice 2079

Patel, Dr JMr SPRINGBORG: That was a triumph of forensic analysis over speculation and spin. I direct my

second question to the Premier. Is it not true that the information that has been provided at the publichearings of the Morris inquiry was known by his government three months ago and, for that matter, hadbeen provided to the management of the Bundaberg Hospital long before that without any action beingtaken by his government? Now after aiding Labor’s ‘Dr Death’ to escape in the first place, the Premierhas finally been forced to act. But with regard to many of these recommendations, is it not true thataction should have been taken by the Premier’s government months ago?

Mr BEATTIE: Just so I am clear, the Leader of the Opposition is talking about the healthdepartment submission to the inquiry? What information is the Leader of the Opposition talking about?I am trying to be helpful.

Mr SPRINGBORG: Let me clarify. I am referring to the information regarding the patients’ deathsand the matters that were provided to the Police Service and Queensland Health months ago.

Mr BEATTIE: Fair enough. The people of Bundaberg have been to hell and back through this.We all know that. If both sides agree on one thing, we agree on that. We needed to have anindependent royal commission established to ensure that every piece of information that was providedby the health department to the government was tested objectively by a fiercely independent royalcommission. That is what is happening.

The deaths that have taken place in Bundaberg needed to be dealt with by a very effectivelegislative and legal tool, that is, a royal commission. That is exactly what has happened. Frankly, afterreceiving some of the initial information, neither the minister nor I were prepared to accept theinformation that we were given without it being tested by a royal commission. That is the appropriatething to be done.

The royal commission enables that information to be tested by someone fiercely independent.No-one in this place or anyone else can argue about the fierce independence of Tony Morris. Not onlythat, the royal commission also gives the people of Bundaberg who have suffered through all of this anopportunity to go before this royal commission and not only share the grief that they have gone throughbut also be given an opportunity to ensure that their experience is never repeated by anyone else again,that is, that the system can be improved.

I am not making and will not make excuses for what has happened. What happened is simplyunacceptable and unforgivable. That is why we have moved to implement the recommendations of thisreport that was given to us today. We are implementing those recommendations today because thosepeople should never have gone through this in the first place. There are things that happened thatshould never have happened. Members will not get any excuses from me or the minister about that.

Unemployment RateMr POOLE: My question is directed to the Premier. It is reported that the state’s unemployment

position remains under five per cent. Is this true? Can the Premier detail just how many jobs have beencreated in this state since 1998?

Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for his question. Over the past seven years I havehad no greater privilege than watching Queensland’s job meter rise. Since June 1998 Queensland hascreated an extra 382,300 jobs. That is just phenomenal. I have to say that is almost beyond my wildestdreams.

Mr Lucas: It is great being a Labor loyalist. Mr BEATTIE: That is what the Labor Party is all about. Despite Queensland having less than

20 per cent of Australia’s population, since June 1998 we have created 28 per cent of all new jobs inAustralia. I ask members to think about that. Queensland has about 19 per cent of the population. Inother words, we are fighting above our weight. In fact, we are leading Australia.

Of the jobs that were created, 245,200 of them were full time. That means that 33.4 per cent ofthe Australian total of full-time jobs were created in Queensland. That is why we have the lowest level ofunemployment in Australia. The Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that Queensland’s trendunemployment rate has been at or below five per cent for seven consecutive months and below thenational unemployment rate for 10 months in a row. Queensland’s trend unemployment rate for Maywas 4.9 per cent compared to the national trend unemployment rate of 5.1 per cent. We are on target toachieve the budget forecast year-average unemployment rate in 2004-05 of five per cent—Queensland’s lowest rate in 30 years. Lawrence was seven when we had this unemployment rate thelast time round. Just think about that!

Mr Springborg: I was working then, too.Mr BEATTIE: I just say to Lawrence that we are very happy he was born—do not misunderstand

me—and we will be there for his birthday.


As the jobs factory of Australia, our productivity is rising. Over the past 12 months we generated112,600 jobs—33.6 per cent of the national total. This represents the highest annual increase inemployment of any state. Nearly two-thirds of the new jobs created in the past five years were full time.Incredibly, unemployment has stayed below five per cent despite us having the highest participation rateon record of 66.6 per cent—the highest number of people ever looking for jobs in the state’s history.

The green paper that the Minister for Employment, Training and Industrial Relations and Ireleased yesterday is designed to maintain jobs growth in the future. We have a skills shortage and insome areas it is critical, but without the right skills in the right places we will lose our competitive edge.As in other facets of the Smart State, without innovation in skills and training we risk stagnation. Weneed Queenslanders to comment on our proposed reforms to vocational education and training so thatwe can continue powering the jobs factory.

I promised jobs, jobs, jobs and we have delivered, delivered, delivered. The next challenge for usis skills, skills, skills and that is exactly what we are going to deliver as well.

Patel, Dr JMr SEENEY: My question without notice is to the Premier. Given the Premier’s long ministerial

statement this morning and his self-congratulations on finally beginning to act to address the problemsthat have beset the health system and Bundaberg Base Hospital, in particular, will the Premier nowfinally apologise to the opposition and apologise to the member for Burnett, in particular, for the attacksthat his government levelled towards us and the member for Burnett when we first raised this issue inthis parliament?

Mr BEATTIE: Let me make it clear: there is nothing self-congratulatory about any of this—absolutely nothing. There is no room for anybody to be gloating about this interim report. There is noroom for us to be gloating about it and there is no room for anyone to be gloating about it. If the memberhas interpreted anything I have said to be self-congratulatory in any way then that is a wronginterpretation. I have not done that, and I reject that. The government in a number of areas here hasbeen embarrassed by what happened in Bundaberg, and so we should be. I have apologised to thepeople of Bundaberg, and so we should have. I have said to the House before that I make no apologiesfor saying that, frankly, we could have done better. I am not going to try in any way to make excuses forwhat has happened. I have made that clear.

Mr Seeney: Are you going to apologise to Rob? Acknowledge that he brought the issue up whenyour health minister didn’t know about it.

Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! That is enough. You have made your point. Mr BEATTIE: The other thing I wanted to say is this—Mr Seeney: You’re not going to. Mr BEATTIE: I am going to come back to it.Mr Seeney: You’re not big enough. Government members interjected.Mr BEATTIE: Hold it! Let me deal with this. There are two things I want to say here. In terms of

getting Patel to return to Australia—I do not want to leave this misunderstanding—now that thisreference has been made by the commission, we will move heaven and earth to try to get him backwithin the law. We will do that. In terms of what happened in Bundaberg and who should becongratulated, in my view Toni Hoffman should be congratulated. Toni Hoffman, who I have written to inthe last few days authorising her to make whatever public comments she wants—and I have done thatpreviously—

Mr Copeland interjected. Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! Member for Cunningham—253.Mr BEATTIE: Can I be really frank: it is a pretty miserable day if politicians are going to try to take

political credit for human misery. I think it is pathetic on everybody’s part. We should not do it and thoseopposite should not do it either. If it were not for Toni Hoffman, who had the courage to come forward,no-one would be any the wiser in here.

Miss Simpson: You just about drove her to suicide.Mr BEATTIE: You cannot even allow me to make a tribute to Toni Hoffman without interjecting. Miss Simpson: She was vilified by your mob.Mr BEATTIE: Not by the minister and not by me. Toni Hoffman is a great Queenslander and I

have enormous regard for her. The people who should be applauded today are people like Toni Hoffmanand the people who had the guts to be whistleblowers. I stand by all of that. This is not about politicalcredit. This is about ensuring we do the right thing. I am not going to move away from the fact that ToniHoffman is the hero here. I am prepared to acknowledge that Mr Messenger did what he should do as a


local member and raised these matters. He has pursued this matter. Yes, he should have done all thosethings.

Miss Simpson interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Hang on! Does the member want me to answer this or does she just want to carry

on? The minister has tried to respond to this. The member for Bundaberg has responded to this. Wehave tried to respond to this. I acknowledge that, as a local member, the member for Burnett has workedhard to bring this to the attention of the inquiry and he should take appropriate credit for it.

Science and ResearchMrs DESLEY SCOTT: My question without notice is to the Premier. Premier, the success of the

Smart State snowball continues. How has the state’s investment in science and research beenreturned?

Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for Woodridge for her question because she knowsthat, as a result of this, science people in her electorate are going to have their lives prolonged andsaved. That is what the QIMR is about. Among all the exciting research under way in the Smart State,there is none more worthy than health and medical research at the QIMR. Michael Good’s team are, inmy view, the real heroes of research in this state. Our health and medical institutes are beacons of hopefor people with chronic and debilitating illness and injuries as well as for sufferers of genetic conditionsand their children. Every institute and hospital research centre is a gem. But today I will single out theQueensland Institute of Medical Research.

QIMR, as it is known, is the largest medical research centre in the Southern Hemisphere, withmore than 800 scientists and support staff. In five years QIMR has recruited 16 senior faculty membersincluding our newly announced Queenslander of the Year, Dr Geoff Hill, and each has established amajor research group. Six of these senior people hail from overseas. They are among more than 100personnel who are visiting from other institutions. QIMR has earned the backing of the Queenslandgovernment as well as other funding sources. For example, last year the government awarded QIMR$2.52 million to establish a collaborative venture: the Queensland Viral Testing and ProductCharacterisation Centre in Brisbane. The centre is a major step forward in the development ofQueensland’s medical drug development industry.

Last year I announced a $500,000 senior research fellowship over five years for ovarian cancerresearch by QIMR’s Dr Penny Webb. Last year the institute also received the Peter Doherty Award fromEducation Queensland, as the minister for education would know. The government also granted$28 million, including $8 million in land value, to the QIMR Clive Berghofer Cancer Centre. Last yearQIMR had the distinction of gaining more than $8 million from the United States National Institute ofHealth, which is believed to be the most this institute has ever granted an Australian organisation. In fiveyears, competitive funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council to QIMR has grownfrom $5 million to $17 million. QIMR has six companies including Q-Pharm—Queensland’s pre-eminentdedicated phase 1 clinical trials centre, with 60 employees—and Q-Gen, an accredited facility producingmaterials for pre-clinical research with 16 employees.

So QIMR has a diverse patronage and a strong international network. No researcher is anisland—the brainy people of our world must cross-fertilise and add value to each other’s work. That ishow life-saving breakthroughs eventuate. That is why QIMR is not only fantastic in Australian terms butalso internationally renowned. Out of this program, as I said at the beginning to the member forWoodridge, people’s lives will be saved.

On Tuesday I, along with the minister for innovation, Tony McGrady, embark on a visit to theinternational biotechnology conference in Philadelphia. There will be 80 scientists accompanying us andthey will include representatives from QIMR. We are determined to build a Smart State, with researchinstitutions like this as part of it. The Smart State is very broad and very innovative, as we know—forexample, even including the Premier’s award for drama last night, which was the first performance ofthe new season. I thought it was a fantastic performance, which the minister for arts and I attended.These are the sorts of things that will give Queensland the edge. This is about opening up our mindswith innovation, research and creativity that will give us the future we need. That is why the QIMR is soimportant for the Smart State. It is not the only one. We have the Institute of Molecular Bioscience at theUniversity of Queensland, QUT, Griffith University, the Mater—the whole lot. We have the brains cominghere. There is a brain gain, not a brain drain anymore.

Ambulance LevyMr McARDLE: My question is directed to the Minister for Emergency Services. I refer the

minister to the ministerial statement he made on Tuesday, claiming that the Liberal Party policy ofexempting businesses from paying the ambulance levy would mean fewer ambulances, paramedicsand stations. Given that the shortfall between the amount collected from the levy and the overall budgetof the service is made up from consolidated revenue, I ask: why does the minister feel that business


owners should be discriminated against by paying the levy on multiple occasions when mostQueenslanders pay the levy once, or does the minister ascribe to the Labor Party policy of taxingbusiness owners over and over and over?

Mr CUMMINS: I thank the member for the question. Again, he has showed his ignorance of theportfolio, realising that the community ambulance cover is raised through Treasury. Every cent theTreasury gives the Queensland Ambulance Service for the community ambulance cover is spent on theQueensland Ambulance Service. The other side of the House wishes to reduce funding. It wishes toreduce the community ambulance cover, which will in turn reduce funding to the QueenslandAmbulance Service. It would rather go back to the old days of the chocolate wheel.

Dr Flegg interjected.Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! I warn the member for Moggill under standing order 253. It is not

your question. Mr CUMMINS: It would rather that the Queensland Ambulance Service personnel, instead of

saving lives, were out there selling chook raffles. It wants to take us back to the dim, dark days when theservice was underfunded. Through the subscription level, we received approximately $65 million a year.

Mr McArdle: All you want to do is tax business.Mr ACTING SPEAKER: Order! The member for Caloundra has asked his question. I now warn

him under standing order 253. Honourable members, I do not understand why you are getting soexcited. Can we just cool it a bit? Let the minister answer the question he has been asked.

Mr CUMMINS: Mr Acting Speaker, with all due respect, what is happening in the QueenslandAmbulance Service is very exciting. We are putting on 350 extra paramedics over a four-year period.Every electorate in the state will benefit from the community ambulance cover, yet the Liberal Partywants to take us back to the old days of underfunding and of budgets being in the red. Those oppositesay, ‘Let’s reduce the community ambulance cover.’ Well, it is about time they tell us whether they aregoing to reduce the 350 paramedics that we are going to employ over a four-year period, whether theyare going to reduce the 200 extra vehicles over a three-year period in this term of government orwhether they are going to not proceed with the 20 new or refurbished ambulance stations that we aregoing to build in this term of government.

Paramedics are working harder than ever before. Those opposite want to work them longerhours. We on this side of the House are very pleased that we are delivering for the people ofQueensland. We are delivering better outcomes and improved response times. With 5,000 extra code 1cases over the last financial year, we are still improving response times. The other side wants to reducefunding. It will reduce funding; it will reduce services.

EthanolMr MULHERIN: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for State Development and

Innovation. Can the minister advise the House as to how the ethanol action plan is being supported inregional Queensland?

Mr McGRADY: I thank the member for Mackay for the question. I take a great deal of interestevery morning in reading the regional press. One gets a far better understanding of what is happeningright across Queensland. In doing so, I have discovered a startling new trend in the opposition. It goessomething like this: when the opposition leader is here in Brisbane, he whinges and he whines aboutevery single thing we do. There is nothing constructive from him; he just whinges and whines. Whenmembers of the National Party go back to their electorates, where Mr Springborg does not see them andcannot hear what they say, something happens. I think it is the fresh air from the farms. What happensis that all of a sudden the backbenchers start to talk about the positive things that the government isdoing.

Mr Malone interjected.Mr McGRADY: They try to get on the bandwagon of the government through our policies. I am

really worried because the more I think about this, the more I worry that there is something sinisterhappening amongst those members opposite. I am very worried that maybe the member for SouthernDowns’s leadership—

Mr Mickel: Is under threat? Mr McGRADY: Is under threat. Ethanol is a great example. Back in his electorate, enjoying the

wide open spaces and out of earshot of the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Lockyer, who issitting here now, heaped praise on the Beattie government’s ethanol plan. He wrote to his local paperand said, ‘I urge all fuel station owners to submit their applications for assistance to upgrade bowsers toE10.’ Meanwhile, the Leader of the Opposition comes down to Brisbane and pours scorn on the plan,labelling this as simply a token part of the budget.

Mr Schwarten: What humbug!


Mr McGRADY: What humbug! There is nothing tokenistic about a $7.3 million commitment oftaxpayers’ money. This is not a one-off. What did opposition members do when we held our verysuccessful roadshow? They fell over themselves getting to the nearest camera to be seen on theroadshow. They tripped over the electric wires of the television cameras trying to get to the media. Thereality is that it is people in those sugar towns which have a great involvement in the future of ethanolwho are supporting us. It is time that the opposition got down to Canberra and tried to force the federalgovernment to mandate ethanol.

Health SystemMrs PRATT: My question is directed to the Premier. Since the Premier has retrospectively offered

$60,000 to cover the Speaker’s overseas travel expenses, will he now find $3,500 to ensure that one ofmy constituents gets the wheelchair recommended as best suited to his needs by his OT and previousMASS personnel so that this pensioner does not have a $3,500 millstone around his neck?

Mr BEATTIE: I have just spoken to the Minister for Health. Is this the issue that the memberraised with him the other day?

Mrs Pratt interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Well, I understand that she is actually going to get the wheelchair. The minister is

advising that. So, the answer to the question, based on the advice from the minister, is, yes, she is goingto get the wheelchair. So there is a really happy ending.

There is something I do want to clarify in relation to the Speaker’s position. I do not know wherethe figure of $60,000 has come from. That is Lawrence’s figure. I have not approved anything. I have notapproved $60,000. I have not approved those trips. I have not approved anything of the kind. Therewere two requirements that I indicated to the House or publicly—I cannot remember which—that I woulddo. One is that there would be a report to the parliament by the Speaker. Two is that I said I wouldexamine whether I would approve those trips in accordance with the guidelines as to whether they wereofficial travel or not.

I have honoured the first part of that today by tabling details of all of the Speaker’s overseastrips—the three that were referred to. I have done that, so I have honoured the first part of what I said.People will go and look at them and the press will beat up on them. That is fair enough. That isdemocracy. The opposition will have a look at it. It is entitled to do that. That is why the reports aretabled here. I have no problem with anyone doing that. I have tabled the three overseas reports, and theSpeaker has provided me with that information. He signed it at the front, he has dated it today, and hewent through it again this morning with my staff to make sure that he was satisfied with it. So we nowhave a report from the Speaker.

The argument is: has he reported? Yes, he has now reported to the parliament in accordance withthe guidelines. As I have indicated, I need to determine these issues further once the DPP has made itsrecommendations. The only reason I have done that, and I have advised the House of that today, is thatI do not want in any way as Premier to do anything that could interfere with the normal processes of theDPP or any recommendations it may make. I have thought more about this and, on reflection, that wasthe appropriate thing to do.

So there were two things that I was going to do. One was to ensure that the Speaker reported. Hehas done that, and I thank him for that. The second thing is that I now need to make a determination asto whether it fits within official business, as I indicated in my ministerial statement this morning. So weare 50 per cent of the way there, but it is the next 50 per cent that will be the most interesting.

Brisbane City Council BudgetMr REEVES: My question without notice is to the minister for public works and housing. On

Wednesday the Brisbane Lord Mayor, ‘Can’t Do’ Campbell Newman, brought down the Brisbane CityCouncil budget. Can the minister please inform members what impacts he expects the budget to havewith regard to affordable housing?

Mr SCHWARTEN: The reality is that it is bad news for anybody who rents a home in Brisbane,because Newman is going to simply jack up the rates of people in rental homes. That simply means thatpeople who are renting a home will now pay more rates than the people who own it. It is a disgracefuland despicable action, as far as I am concerned, and it sharply contrasts with what our government isdoing in reducing land tax to make housing more affordable. Next time people see Newman up on hishind legs talking about affordable housing in Queensland—

Mr Welford: Or homelessness. Mr SCHWARTEN:—or homelessness, the reality is that he speaks with a forked tongue. The

truth is that the owners of 168,000 rental homes in Brisbane are about to jack up their rents to coverwhat Newman is doing. If Newman wants to be equitable he should have the decency and courage to

2084 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 10 Jun 2005

charge all home owners, not just pick out the rental section—the people who can afford to pay theleast—and make them pay more rates. The fact of the matter is that a 70 per cent increase in some ofthese places will send an horrific message to landlords. It will be a disincentive for people to invest inhousing and, of course, we will end up with higher rents.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Fraser): Order! The time allotted for questions has now expired.

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS REGISTRATION AMENDMENT BILL

First ReadingHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (10.31 am): I

present a bill for an act to amend the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001. I present theexplanatory notes, and I move—That the bill be now read a first time.

Motion agreed to.

Second ReadingHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (10.31 am): I

move—That the bill be now read a second time.

The Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry was established on 26 April 2005. Earlier today Iwas given a copy of the commission of inquiry’s interim report. In the ministerial statement I made aboutthe report I committed the government to implementing all of the report’s 10 recommendations.Recommendations A to D of the interim report were about amendments to the Medical PractitionersRegistration Act 2001. The Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001 governs the registration ofmedical practitioners.

Recommendation A is implemented by clauses 3, 4 and 5 of the bill, which amend sections 84,149 and 150J of the act respectively. These three sections currently describe when a registration maybe cancelled. The amendments aim to improve and broaden the circumstances in which the giving ofmaterially false information or a document will enable cancellation of a registration under the act. Eachof the three amended sections do this through referral to the proposed new section 273 which, as I willexplain, seeks to broaden the circumstances when information or a document is taken to be materiallyfalse.

Recommendation B is implemented by clause 6 of the bill, which inserts a new section 161 intothe act. The new section 161 does two things. First, the new section 161(1) adds a new limb to theexisting offences in section 161 by creating the new offence of a person who is not a registrant allowinghimself or herself to be held out as being eligible to registration under the act. Second, the new section161(2) creates a new offence of a person who is not a registrant doing certain things under the colour orpretence of being a registered medical practitioner. The penalty for this second offence is set at up to2,000 penalty units or three years imprisonment.

Recommendation C is implemented by clause 7 of the bill, which lists the new indictable offencesin the act. Recommendation D is implemented by clause 8 of the bill, which inserts a new section 273 ofthe act. The new section 273 defines the circumstances in which information or a document is taken tobe materially false. The aim of comprehensively describing these circumstances is to ensure that thesorts of problems that have been raised through the Patel case are covered off in the act. As discussedin the interim report, these include the provision of a copy of a document that is no longer accurate orone that is incomplete or is misleading.

The new section 273 then goes on to create new offences arising out of the provision of materiallyfalse information. Section 273(2) makes it an offence to give materially false information or a documentto the Queensland Medical Board. The penalty for this offence is increased from 50 penalty units to 200penalty units. Section 273(3) makes it an offence to breach section 273(2) in relation to an applicationfor registration as a medical practitioner. The penalty is a maximum of 2,000 penalty units or three yearsimprisonment. Section 273(4) makes it an offence to not tell the Queensland Medical Board thatinformation or a document previously provided is false as soon as the offender becomes aware that it isfalse. The penalty for this offence is 200 penalty units. Finally, the new section 273(5) makes it anoffence for a person to act or practise as a registered medical practitioner after also contraveningsection 273(2), which relates to providing materially false information to the Queensland Medical Boardwhen seeking registration, or failing to convey that the information was false after becoming aware of it.Again, the maximum penalty is 2,000 penalty units or up to three years imprisonment.

10 Jun 2005 Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2085

For the record, I would ask that the ministerial statement that I delivered this morning and theministerial statement delivered by the Minister for Health be viewed as being part of this second readingspeech. I do that because, under the rules of interpretation, second reading speeches are in fact lookedat in terms of interpretation of the legislation. Rather than waste the time of the House today, I want theministerial statements of both the Minister for Health and me to be viewed as part of the second readingspeech. I also want to draw to the attention of the House the media release issued by the royalcommission last night. It sets out a number of matters that took place in discussion between the ministerand me. I seek leave to have that incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.Bundaberg Hospital Commission of InquiryMEDIA RELEASEThe Commissioner, Anthony Morris QC, together with Deputy Commissioners Sir Llew Edwards AC and Margaret Vider RN, willbe attending on the Premier of Queensland, the Honourable Peter Beattie MP, at 9.00 am on Friday 10th June 2005, in the formerLegislative Council Chamber, Parliament House, Brisbane.The purpose of the attendance will be to convey to the Premier an Interim Report with respect to certain matters arising out of theexisting Terms of Reference of the Commission of Inquiry, and the evidence received by the Commission of Inquiry to date.Separately, the Commissioner and Senior Counsel assisting the Commission of Inquiry (Mr. David Andrews SC) met with thePremier on Wednesday afternoon (8th June), to inform the Premier regarding progress of the Inquiry. Other than arranging topresent an Interim Report to the Premier, the outcomes of the meeting were:• The Premier invited Mr. Morris to advise whether he considers that any amendments to the existing Terms of Reference

are required. It was agreed that there is no present need to amend the Terms of Reference.• The Premier invited Mr. Morris to advise if he expects that the Commission of Inquiry will conclude by the date originally

scheduled, namely 30th September 2005. Mr. Morris informed the Premier that he remains optimistic that no extension oftime will be necessary.

David GrothSecretary9 June 2005

Mr BEATTIE: Finally, I commend the bill to the House. Debate, on motion of Mr Springborg, adjourned.


Sitting Days and Hours; Remaining Stages; Allocation of Time Limit OrderHon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (10.36 am), by leave, without

notice: I move—That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended to enable the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Billto pass through all its remaining stages at this day’s sitting.Further, that under the provisions of Standing Order 159, the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill be declared anurgent Bill and the following time limits apply to enable the Bill to be passed through its remaining stages at this day’s sitting-(a) Minister in reply by 3.55 pm(b) Second reading by 4.15 pm;(c) Consideration in detail by 4.27 pm;(d) Third reading by 4.29 pm; and(e) Long Title agreed by 4.30 pm.If the stage has not been completed by the time specified, Mr Speaker shall put all remaining questions necessary to pass the Bill,including clauses and schedules en bloc and any amendments to be moved by the Minister in charge of the Bill, without furtheramendment or debate.Further, that for this Bill, speaking times on the second reading debate be as follows-(a) Leader of the Opposition or nominee—20 minutes;(b) Other Members—10 minutes; and(c) Mover in reply—20 minutes."

Motion agreed to.

2086 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 10 Jun 2005

APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENT) BILLAPPROPRIATION BILL

Second Reading (Cognate Debate)Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill

Resumed from 9 June (see p. 2061). Mr FENLON (Greenslopes—ALP) (10.38 am): I rise to speak in support of the appropriation bills

for the 2005-06 Queensland budget. This is a budget that continues to establish a great future forQueensland at a macro level and at a micro level. It is very clear that we have a very sound macroapproach in Queensland, especially with the Treasurer’s pronouncements in his budget speech, in threeparts: for the first time there is a long-term plan for infrastructure development for south-eastQueensland, including an additional investment of approximately $2 billion over four years for the firstphase of the plan; the earmarking of more than $470 million over four years to support the 10-yearSmart State Strategy; and a comprehensive set of measures to assist the most disadvantaged people inour communities, including an additional $180 million over four years for various disability services,further funding to support child safety reforms, initiatives to improve Indigenous health and a package ofinitiatives to address homelessness.

Often governments are seen as remote from the people. If you ask the person in the street what acertain government is doing or has been doing or will do, they are often lost for words. That is not thecase here in Queensland. When I talk to people in the street in my electorate and around the communityone clear element that they all identify with is that the job that this government is getting on with is theSmart State Strategy. They see that as something that is very important in terms of the future of theirfamilies, the future of their children in particular in relation to their prospects of gaining good employmentin the future. What I mean by good employment is well-paying jobs that are going to be sustainedthrough high levels of education, and an education and career progression in jobs that will stand veryproudly in the international marketplace. That is what we are about here in Queensland.

At a micro level I am very pleased that the achievements that have been made in the past yearsunder this Beattie government are being built on. Central to those achievements in my local area are theachievements in the education area; making sure that our schools at a micro level are going to achievewhat is needed to drive the Smart State Strategy. Indeed, Greenslopes schools are great winners andthe Greenslopes electorate is a winner out of this state budget. Some of the impacts of the budgetinclude the following: $4.86 million to support people with disabilities and their families, including$973,000 to support adults with a disability to maintain their living arrangements and to participate in thecommunity and $926,000 to assist families caring for people with high support needs. One of the clearareas that we are seeing emerge in electorates such as mine are families where parents are reaching astage at which they are unable to care for a disabled adult and they are going to need a lot of support inthe future. I hope that this funding will go a long way to supporting those people.

Some $4.27 million will be allocated to community organisations under the Home and CommunityCare program; $30,000 for school-age care services at Coorparoo State School, Holland Park StateSchool, Marshall Road State School, Our Lady of Mount Carmel Catholic Primary School and StJoachim’s Catholic Primary School, with a total project cost of $89,000; $58,000 for domestic violenceprevention and $265,000 to provide counselling and support for young people at risk of homelessness,at a total state government contribution of $796,000; $502,000 to community organisations to providemental health services; $96,000 to community organisations under the National Drug Strategy foralcohol and drug prevention campaigns; $14,573 to the Metropolitan Touch Association to upgradelighting for touch football at Whites Hill Reserve at Camp Hill under the Minor Facilities Program for2005; $38,136 to the Tarragindi Churches Tigers Sporting Association to install lighting at their field atTarragindi—the other end of the electorate; $84,000 towards constructing roads and drainage works inthe Greenslopes electorate and a $44,000 contribution to the 2005-06 pedestrian crossingimprovements at Mount Carmel Catholic Primary School.

There is an allocation of $250,000 to Seville Road State School to upgrade special educationfacilities, including $20,000 for fitout. Some $48,000 is also allocated to Wellers Hill State School tocomplete the major upgrade of the resource centre which is under way right at this moment to supportICT initiatives, including $3,000 for a fitout, with a total project cost of $488,000. This is a major projectthat we are getting on with at that school which will complement the brand-new prep year facility that willbe constructed. There is an allocation of $25,000 to Holland Park State School to commence planningfor additional amenities, including $1,000 for fitout, with a total project cost of $305,000, and $559,000will be allocated under the Triple R Maintenance Program for the asbestos roof replacement programand for repainting at Coorparoo State School, at Holland Park State High School, asbestos roofing atCavendish Road State High School, Coorparoo Secondary College and Holland Park State HighSchool. I am very pleased that Greenslopes has figured very prominently in this asbestos removalprogram. It certainly does acknowledge that a lot of our schools are the older schools in Brisbane whichfell into the era when that obnoxious building product was used. There is an allocation of $72,000 for

10 Jun 2005 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 2087

high priority maintenance related to reflooring at Cavendish Road State High School and Holland ParkState High School and money has been allocated for the playground at Seville Road State School.

We will also benefit in Greenslopes from $76,000 in continued funding for the South BrisbaneTactical Crime Squad, which targets known crime hot spots with a strong emphasis on investigatingproperty crime and drug offences. I am thrilled to see a continuation of this program because thefeedback I continue to get from officers in my electorate is that these crime squads really are effective.They go in and they clean up the hot spots which are now identified under the intelligence system thatthe police are working with very effectively. This is a great initiative. There is $5 million to continue theinstallation of noise barriers along sections of the Citytrain network with a total project cost of$19.72 million. There is $1.5 million to begin planning of the eastern busway from Buranda to Carindaleand to start staged implementation including bus priority measures and signature bus stops along OldCleveland Road, with a total project cost of $711.41 million. I hope that we are able to provide thebusinesses and residents along that road with some information about that process in the very nearfuture.

There is an allocation of $200,000 to continue installation of traffic management devices on thePacific Highway, with a total project cost of $2.1 million; $1.38 million towards traffic safetyimprovements at various locations in Brisbane which we are part of and which we will benefit from;$425,000 to continue upgrading signal coordination in Brisbane, with a total project cost of $1 million;and $375,000 to continue placing traffic management devices within Brisbane, with a total project costof $1.27 million. There are many other elements that I could mention here in terms of sorting out trafficissues around Brisbane which I know the residents of Greenslopes, who are really inner-city dwellers,will benefit from a great deal.

An amount of $1.04 million is allocated to manage demand for services in the QEII Health ServiceDistrict; $1.35 million to manage demand for the Mater Hospital Health Service District; $3.76 million tomanage demand for the Princess Alexandra Hospital Health Service District; and $3.94 million for thePrincess Alexandra Hospital Health Service District for medical equipment, including anaesthetic units,electrocardiographic machines, transmitters, medical video cameras, patient monitors, sanitisers andvital signs monitors. These are important complements to an already fantastic hospital service providedon the south side, especially through the essentially brand-new Princess Alexandra Hospital.The amount of $6.93 million is also allocated to continue the Mater Hospital redevelopment, with a totalproject cost of $111 million. The Mater is a great hospital that services our southside suburbs.The amount of $768,000 is allocated to the QEII Health Service District for medical equipment includingautoclaves, dental chairs, dental units and dental lights.

This $8 billion capital program is indeed the largest ever delivered in Queensland and it will havea flow-on effect in terms of employment that will affect all of Queensland. This is always a great driver ofthe Queensland economy that previous Queensland governments have ensured is in place. This$8 billion will continue to drive the building sector in Queensland. It is a $1.9 billion increase over lastyear and will be spent on key building projects such as roads, hospitals and schools.

This is a great budget that will, at the macro and micro level, drive the Queensland economy,provide a sound future for our families in terms of employment and ensure that the services are in placeto meet the future demand and population growth in Queensland. I commend this bill to the House.

Miss SIMPSON (Maroochydore—NPA) (10.50 am): I will be addressing issues within myelectorate and my portfolio, the latter of which I will pursue further during the estimates process. I say atthe outset that if the estimates process is to be of true value to this state then it is time we had a Senatestyle estimates process with the powers to properly and fully scrutinise the budget and departmentalperformance and the opportunity to question public servants directly. That does not happen under thecurrent system.

The estimates process must be reformed to allow greater accountability and scrutiny of thegovernment’s actions. For example, MPs should not be prevented from directly asking public servantsquestions. Also non-government MPs, particularly the National Party opposition, require greaterfreedom to fully pursue lines of questioning without unreasonable time constraints.

For example, the Transport and Main Roads portfolio has been assigned three hours forestimates questioning on 13 July. Half that time is for government members and of the non-governmentmembers’ time one-third is assigned to non-opposition members. Thus, the National Party oppositionhas 60 minutes to ask questions which amounts to about 20 questions without notice and sevenquestions on notice.

Moving to issues within the budget. The Dr Death scandal which has claimed up to 87 lives andwhich is due to the corruption and bullying in the health department came on top of the previous healthminister’s disgraceful behaviour during the indemnity crisis which saw scores of qualified Australiandoctors leave the public hospital system. A pattern of bullying and a shoot-the-messenger culture wasraised to an art form under the previous health minister, Wendy Edmond. It continues today. This budgetdoes not fix that.


The interim report from Tony Morris QC has been tabled this morning. Some of its observationsand recommendations vindicate the concerns expressed by the National Party opposition. One of theissues is the need for Queensland Health to try to recruit doctors, particularly VMOs, visiting medicalofficers, to positions before trying less orthodox avenues.

Let me tell members what has happened on the Sunshine Coast. I relate this to today’s budget.Today there are Sunshine Coast women who are being sent to the Logan Hospital for gynaeprocedures. The budget outlines that there will be new hospital facilities. I welcome additional healthservices particularly where they do not cannibalise existing services. But today women from rightthroughout the Sunshine Coast are being referred to Logan Hospital for gynae procedures. It isdamnable that this health department promised that they would receive their services locally. Insteadthey have been told that it will be a two or three-year wait on the Sunshine Coast.

How does that relate to what happened with Wendy Edmond, the current disgrace in the healthdepartment and the visiting medical officers issue? Visiting medical officers spoke about quality issuesand the indemnity crisis. They were rewarded by Queensland Health by having their sessions cut back.That is typical of the way this Beattie government has operated.

We see announcements about health in the budget but in reality the culture goes on. This culturehas seen good people, appropriately qualified people leave the Sunshine Coast health system as wellas elsewhere in Australia. The Sunshine Coast health system relies heavily upon visiting medicalofficers who work in both the public and private system.

Let us look at what happened with the indemnity crisis. There was a time when the last existingindemnity providers had collapsed and we had public servants relying not only on public systemindemnity but also on private indemnity. There were concerns about inadequacy of the indemnity coverof Queensland Health. When the private provider collapsed they realised that they did not haveadequate cover from the Queensland Health system. They went to the then health minister WendyEdmond and raised their concerns. She did not want to deal with it. She said that if they commit criminalacts then of course we are not going to cover them. That is not what the doctors were asking for. Theywere asking for the same level of indemnity cover that other professionals have. They did not want to beindemnified from criminal acts but they wanted the same level of insurance cover that any public servantoperating within their area of expertise would have. She refused to listen, abused them and called themterrible people. These people who had been supplying services to the public system for years felt thatthey were worthless, felt that they were not wanted by the system. Many walked but others werepushed.

That is why today many services on the Sunshine Coast are still struggling to get back on an evenkeel. The state government still advertises certain positions and announces them at election time asbeing some new budget treat. But in fact they are old positions where it has forced well-qualifiedAustralian people out of the positions.

Despite the promises of this government, Sunshine Coast women are being forced to go to LoganHospital for gynae procedures or else face a two to three-year wait. That is unacceptable and farcicalwhen we consider the growth on the Sunshine Coast. The hospital facilities there do have the capacityto do this work, but the government is not funding the staff to carry out this work and VMOs have hadtheir sessions cut back.

I want to also address the issue of roads. Over the next four years a significant amount of fundingis to be spent in my electorate. I welcome that though I will continue to draw people’s attention to thefact that for seven years there has been an infrastructure drought under this government. For sevenyears we have seen infrastructure dip, as a proportion of the overall budget. This budget starts toaddress that. Still only about 15 per cent of the overall budget is being assigned to this area. Ourconcern is that unless infrastructure, particularly in the boom times, is adequately and consistentlyfunded then we are going to have a big problem when the wheel turns and the boom times are not asrosy.

I welcome the allocation of $33.6 million towards roads in my electorate as part of a four-yearprogram for $270 million upgrades on the Sunshine Motorway and Maroochydore Road. However, Irepeat my calls for the Maroochy River Bridge on the Sunshine Motorway to be fast-tracked. Currently,10,000 vehicles in excess of what the bridge should carry travel over that bridge on a daily basis. That isthe arterial road that services the whole of the Sunshine Coast, not just my electorate. People fromNoosa through to Caloundra commute through that area. It is impacting upon business and uponpeople’s quality of life.

I campaigned on the need for the bridge’s duplication at the last election and the governmentrefused to fund it. While I was pleased that after the election the government did include it in the RoadsImplementation Program and mooted it in the budget, there still needs to be more funding in this budgetin order to fast-track that project. At the start of this year Main Roads told me that it was investigatinghow to bring the project forward. I note that when the Premier later visited the Sunshine Coast heconfirmed those investigations were under way, as I was previously advised. However, I believe more


can be done. I urge him to do it. Currently the whole of the Sunshine Coast is paying the price of theinfrastructure drought that he forced upon Queensland and upon our area.

I believe there are interim improvements that could be made to traffic through the Pacific Paradiseroundabout and also the Ocean Drive intersection which I have drawn to the attention of Main Roads.I am awaiting its advice on that. I have been advised that some presettlement works may take place onsome of the new lanes to the north and south of the bridge towards the end of the year. This wouldmean that road fill would be put in these lanes and allowed to settle for 12 months which is in keepingwith geotechnical requirements. But still more needs to be done. That is why I will continue to raise thisissue and demonstrate to the government that it must listen to the people. They have spoken stronglyabout this issue.

Some $5.8 million is allocated to the Pacific Paradise bypass and interchange. The constructionwork is expected to start towards the end of 2006 with completion in early 2008. About $5 million of the$35 million has been allocated to the southern access ramps of the Sunshine Motorway. This is due tostart in mid-2006 and be completed by June 2007. The southern access itself is a council road but theramps are a state responsibility.

Design work on the Maroochy River bridge and duplication works up to Maroochydore Roadroundabout has an allocation of $1 million out of the $110 million total. Maroochydore Road at KundaPark to the Bruce Highway has an allocation of $21 million of the $90 million. Construction on the KundaPark section is to start later this year for completion in 2006. The Bruce Highway to Pike Street sectionwill start in mid-2006 and be completed in 2007.

But, as many landowners know, the land acquisitions and the route were resolved five to six yearsago. This is just indicative of the fact that a lot of planning has been done—and I welcome appropriateplanning—but the planning processes have been allowed to be strung out on all of these projects,particularly the Pacific Paradise bypass. That situation has been ludicrous beyond extreme in that therewas not even a detailed design option or a preliminary design option in a planning study that lastedabout six years from its conception to its completion. That is the sort of stupidity we have seen with thisgovernment.

Let us talk further about roads. The Tugun bypass fiasco continues. The budget papers show thatnot one red cent of the $22.6 million for the Tugun bypass last year was spent. It has simply been rolledforward to this year. So $22.6 million allocated last year for the Tugun bypass was not spent and theproject spending to date has actually been cut. To add insult to injury, the minister is conningQueenslanders that the project is still on track. Maybe he should get on down there for a ‘non’ sodturning ceremony, because if it is on track then his own budget papers have red ink and lies written allover them. Despite what has obviously been a massive budget blow-out in the operational cost of theTransLink integrated public transport project, total transport portfolio capital spending has onlyincreased to 35.46 per cent compared to 45 per cent under the last Nationals-led government.

Unfortunately, this increased transport portfolio funding is not being equitably distributed, with thepercentage of road funding in the Brisbane region increasing by almost two per cent while funding in theregions of Wide Bay, Darling Downs, south-west, central-west, Mackay and north Queensland hasreduced in percentage terms. Unfortunately, the Beattie government is squandering a uniqueopportunity to invest in Queensland’s future with the majority of meaningful infrastructure projects stillonly on the political horizon two decades away—two decades away! I do welcome long overdueincreases in capital spending after the capital infrastructure drought under the Beattie government, but Ido criticise the cuts to councils’ road funding. There have been cuts to councils’ road funding, and that isreally going to impact. Road funding is budgeted to increase from $946 million to $1.252 billion thanks tothe GST and increased federal road funding. In percentage terms, road funding has increased to15.7 per cent of the state’s capital spending, up from the miserable 13.45 per cent last year. But this isstill well down from the record 24 per cent under the last Nationals-led government. With regard to thetransport infrastructure scheme, which provides funding to local councils, I was critical earlier in relationto those issues and the way in which this government has managed them.

I also want to address issues in my electorate and the funding allocated in this budget towardsthe strategy for the Mooloolah River mouth or Mooloolaba harbour. I gave the government a big beltover the fact that it had allowed the silting up of this important port harbour and that it was very slow toact when it came to the need to dredge this particular river mouth. Finally, we forced its hand and I waspleased that it finally acted. Obviously I will be interested in the results of the strategy that will beimplemented. I have campaigned very strongly about the need to ensure that the port harbour mouth isavailable as a safe harbour mouth. It is a train harbour mouth and has been one of the safest accesspoints on the east coast until recent years because of the neglect due to a lack of maintenance by thisgovernment. There is a very important fishing industry there. Many people on the Sunshine Coast donot realise that the fishing industry is worth about $80 million in gross turnover of product—that is ahuge amount—but the multiplier effect is far greater. Then of course there is the recreational fishingindustry and recreational boating in general. It is extremely important that that is a safe harbourentrance and that it is maintained as such. I have mentioned in a previous address the changes to land


tax. I believe that they are certainly necessary with the increases in property values, and I welcome thealteration to the thresholds.

What is important from an environmental point of view, though, is more investment in the area ofwater and waste water management, and this is an issue where the Beattie government has faileddismally. My colleagues have continually raised the need for appropriate funding assistance to help getthe grey water project to the downs off the ground, but in addition to that very important project there areother areas of Queensland, too, where proper waste water recycling provisions need the subsidy andthe assistance of government. It is big ticket stuff, but it is about the future. We do need goodconservation and recycling of water. We do need additional water facilities. It is within the province ofgovernments to ensure that these things are delivered in a timely way. Only too recently a number oftowns in Queensland have come very close to running out of drinking water during this drought, letalone rural and regional areas which are already suffering not just from a lack of drinking water; theirproduction has also suffered due to a lack of water supply. It has been too easy in our urban areas—andI live in an urban area—where we have taken it for granted that water would be on tap, but withoutproper infrastructure and investment in this area, which are lacking with this government, that is a veryreal threat. We are sitting right on the cusp at this time. It is time for action with infrastructure spendingand recycling spending, and that action is disappointingly not present within this budget.

Other project funding has been mooted within the budget with regard to child safety, and thiscontinues to be a major area of concern to me. The funding increases in this area have been necessaryin recent years, but what we have seen instead is a leaderless department in great distress as childrencontinue not to be seen in a timely manner. I am most concerned that, once again, despite budgetallocations, with regard to the accountability to ensure that staff are supported and, most importantly,potentially abused children are seen within the nominated times, this budget simply does not addressthese issues. It is not only a case of how much money there is; it is how well it is spent. In recent yearsthere has been a deficit in good management, a deficit in good accountability by this government.Certainly, as evidenced by the health system, it is tragic when accountability is taken out of a systemand we see the impact that that has on real lives. In my electorate there has been a recategorising ofchildren who have been on the waitlist for investigation as being potentially abused. They have beendowngraded to a status where they will never have a visit or maybe not even a phone call and follow-up.That, to my mind, is a recipe for disaster and is a recipe which is of great concern to our community.

I also want to address the issue of public transport on the Sunshine Coast and the need to fast-track these provisions, as well as the upgrade of the north coast railway line. Maroochydore does needa new transit centre to help facilitate increases in public transport. CAMCOS has been one of thosestudies that has been out there for six or eight years now; it is certainly over six years since its inception.That corridor is under acquisition and some bus priority measures are being considered, but thoserecommendations have been on the table for years. Once again, we have seen some fairly paltryallocations when one considers that the report was there, the recommendations were there, the actionplans, if the government was telling the truth, were there but the money was not. Until these issues areaddressed in a timely way, we will see a desperate catch-up without proper and timely delivery of theseservices in a way that meets the growing needs of a very diverse area such as the Sunshine Coast. Iwould certainly impress upon the government that our public transport needs and in particular theCAMCOS corridor need to be fast-tracked and brought forward.

I have one last comment to make with regard to the Maroochy River bridge. It relates to publictransport and alternative transport. Once again, I urge the minister to ensure that there are pedestrianand cyclist connections on the bridge to the north and to the south. Although the minister has previouslygiven positive indications that these connections would be considered, it is essential that we have notonly proper road networks but also alternative transport networks for cycling. I am referring not only torecreational cycling but also to commuting cycling. In this day and age, I know that many people want tochoose green transport alternatives.

Hon. MF REYNOLDS (Townsville—ALP) (Minister for Child Safety) (11.09 am): It is quiteappropriate that I follow the member for Maroochydore, because in my contribution to this debate I willrefer to child safety matters. The statement that the member for Maroochydore made to the Houseyesterday was nonsense and cannot be substantiated in any way, shape or form.

Firstly, I want to refer to the Child Safety budget. As Minister for Child Safety I am very proud notonly of the budget that was handed down on Tuesday and the budget allocation for my area ofministerial responsibility but also of the staff about whom allegations were made in this Houseyesterday. I know the staff at the Sunshine Coast office of child safety are doing their very best for thevulnerable children and young people on the Sunshine Coast.

The Child Safety budget provides an extra $123 million to my department and represents a record$45.3 per cent increase in spending on child protection. That budget has been increased because boththe Premier and the Treasurer showed leadership and indicated that that increase was required to bringforward these three-year reforms in child safety. Our growth in funding for 2005-06 is more than doublethe money promised in the reform blueprint for implementing the CMC’s recommendations. That willensure that our reforms stay on track and that we can account for growth in demand and services.


An amount of $88 million will be spent over the next four years on more foster-carers. Foster-carers across Queensland do a great job. They are the backbone of the child protection system. I wantto again place on record that we value foster-carers and believe they are doing a great job. We hope torecruit an extra 500 carers in the next financial year and at least that number as well in subsequentyears. An additional $28.8 million will be invested in employing child safety officers and support staff todeal with the up to 47,000 child protection notifications that we expect to receive in 2005-06.

The members opposite, including the member for Maroochydore, seem to be blithely unawarethat the number of new permanent positions will be increased by 151 as the department moves fromtemporary employment arrangements to permanent arrangements. If the member for Maroochydorehad read the budget documentation she would know that. But she does not want to say anything aboutthose new permanent positions and what they will mean for the Sunshine Coast.

An additional $25 million in capital funding over two years will continue the extension andexpansion of our child safety service centre accommodation for staff statewide. The Beattie governmentwill invest $22.6 billion in a comprehensive cross-agency initiative to enhance mental health andbehavioural counselling services for children in care who have complex needs. That will involve mydepartment, it will involve Disability Services Queensland, it will involve Education Queensland and itwill also involve Queensland Health. This $22.6 million will be spread incredibly well across all of thoseservices. The service will be piloted on the Gold Coast, on the Sunshine Coast and at Townsville fromAugust with a statewide roll-out in 2006.

A new multisystemic therapy service will commence operations at Inala. It will provide communitybased intervention for children with significant and multiple needs. This service works with individualchildren, their families, their peer groups and their schools in a concerted and intensive way to preventfurther harm. In 2005-06, $193.6 million—or almost half of the department’s total operating budget—willbe allocated to grants and subsidies. By the way, we should remember that we are spending nearly$400 million. What did the National Party government spend in this area about seven years ago? About$60 million. Yet the National Party in this House has the audacity to be critical of social service spendingby Labor governments.

An amount of $19.6 million will be allocated to non-government organisations to delivercommunity based child protection services. An amount of $1.4 million will be allocated to staff andprojects to strengthen local partnerships with the non-government sector. Importantly, an amount of$9.4 million has been allocated for new or enhanced Indigenous recognised agencies and a peak bodywill be allocated a further $0.43 million to help build the capacity of these agencies.

I refer to the points that were raised by the member for Maroochydore in her two-minute speech inthe House yesterday morning. It is a pity the member did not talk to me about these matters. As theminister, I have indicated that I will be open, transparent and accountable. I brief the oppositionregularly. Last Wednesday night I briefed the Leader of the Opposition on matters pertaining to childsafety. I brief the shadow minister, Rosemary Menkens, on a regular basis. But the member forMaroochydore seems to have used her shadow health status to be critical in this House rather thanspeak to the minister. I think the member can do a lot better for her constituents. It is disappointing.

Yesterday in this House the member for Maroochydore attacked the Department of Child Safetyand made a number of allegations against staff. I must say that in relation to this matter I am dismayedby the audacity of the member. She is attacking the staff of the Sunshine Coast office. The truth is—andall members know it, including those opposite—that the National Party left Queensland with a legacy ofneglect across all social services, including child protection. The many decades of National Party rule inthis state—and the Liberal Party was part of it as well—meant that social service expenditure laggeddisgracefully behind such expenditure in every other state and territory in Australia. It has taken a Laborgovernment to finally deliver fair and equitable social services to the people of Queensland in the area ofChild Safety, in the area of Disability Services and in the area of Health. We have expended money inareas that the opposition would never have recognised as being worthy of expenditure.

Although the opposition is happy to talk about child protection, while in government it neverdelivered. Assertions by the member for Maroochydore that my department is reworking lists andremoving the notifications of children requiring an investigation are absolutely untrue. If the member hadbothered to raise these issues with me, instead of coming into this House and making outrageousclaims I could have provided her with a briefing on how thresholds for investigations are set and thework that we are doing in that very, very important area.

Miss SIMPSON: I rise to a point of order. The minister is misleading the House. I find hiscomments offensive. I suggest that the minister investigate the recategorising of children and thedowngrading of their status, which has occurred recently.

Mr REYNOLDS: I do not think I have said that. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Shine): Order! What did the member find offensive?


Miss SIMPSON: I find it offensive that the minister said I have misled this House. I have notmisled this House. I ask him to withdraw it. I also ask him to investigate the children whose categorieshave been downgraded.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mr REYNOLDS: The perpetuation of this nonsense and claims that the child protection officers

on the Sunshine Coast have been sacked are irresponsible and incorrect. We have increased thestaffing numbers on the Sunshine Coast ahead of the blueprint’s requirements.

I want to state this very clearly to the member for Maroochydore. Permanent staffing levels willhave been increased by 55 per cent on the Sunshine Coast by the 2005-06 financial year. Additionally, asecond office will be opened at Caloundra next year to improve responses to cases of child abuse andneglect. During the creation of the new stand-alone Department of Child Safety, some temporary staffwere employed in various offices as a transitional arrangement. All members of this House know thetremendous work that staff of the Department of Child Safety do. I am going to stick up for the staff ofthe Sunshine Coast office even if the member is not going to. The work they do is often traumatic. It ischallenging work and the staff deserve our support.

I can advise the House today that the Beattie government is not only on track to deliver theseunprecedented staff increases that were recommended in the blueprint but also on track to exceedthose staff increases. We are making holistic and systemic reforms to child protection services inQueensland. The member for Maroochydore should stop showing her disrespect of this House bymaking unfounded claims. It is unfair for the staff of the Department of Child Safety to have to listen towhat I believe is rubbish from members opposite. They are doing a magnificent job in reforming the childprotection system. That is their job and they are doing it very, very well.

Hon. NI CUNNINGHAM (Bundaberg—ALP) (11.19 am): My electorate of Bundaberg is a bigwinner in this budget, with another multimillion dollar investment in our city, our community and ourfuture. The budget announcements have been widely welcomed in my community and, on behalf of ourresidents, I say thank you and congratulations to our Treasurer, our Premier, of course, and all ministerswho have clearly listened to the needs of Queenslanders.

The announcement in the budget of a commitment of $42 million to build a ring-road to the southof our city is great news. This road was badly needed during the Goss term when I was mayor ofBundaberg, and it was agreed to by the then minister for transport, Jim Elder. However, it has sincelapsed and the travel congestion now in Bundaberg has reached the point where something has to bedone quickly to answer the grave concerns of industry, commerce, community and parents whosechildren are battling it out on the way to and from school with B-doubles, cane trucks, refrigerated vans,semis, buses, fuel tankers and cement trucks, and the volume is growing daily. I hope this project can befast-tracked, and if construction could start at the Bargara Road end then traffic lights at that corner, withsafe pedestrian crossings, will assist students of St Lukes, Kalkie state primary and East Bundabergprimary schools.

The other exciting allocation is the $20.3 million that will finish the major Burnett River Dam, orParadise Dam as it is often called. It will be completed on time, bringing water security to not justBundaberg but the entire region. This is valuable infrastructure being provided in the regions by thisBeattie Labor government. As well, Bundaberg families are big winners, with over $26 million allocatedto special projects, providing a real stimulus to our economy and a helping hand to those who need itmost. Disabled people and their families will gain $5.47 million in support. Students and teachers willbenefit from $2.1 million of upgrades at our schools. TAFE will gain $1.5 million and public housingconstruction will exceed $2 million. The amount of $906,000 will tackle domestic violence. A women’sshelter will be built and $4.99 million will be spent on better management of our natural resources.

The Turtle Interpretive Centre has again been funded, with an increased allocation of $3.8 million,to allow the city council to proceed with that tourist project. The amount of $11.8 million has beencommitted to intersection work in our city, including traffic lights promised for Walter Street in NorthBundaberg. Another allocation of $668,000 to sport and recreation clubs will help provide a healthylifestyle with better venues and facilities. We will gain from some $56 million that will be invested in theWide Bay-Burnett region for training programs and $8.1 million to create jobs through this government’sBreaking the Unemployment Cycle initiatives, which have succeeded in bringing unemployment inQueensland down to the lowest rate in 30 years.

My constituents will benefit from the very welcome new land tax changes and the increasedbudgets for health, disability services, child safety, infrastructure, education and in almost every otherportfolio. Indeed, the good news for regional Queensland is that, from the record capital works budget,60 per cent will be spent outside the Brisbane region. The good news for Bundaberg residents and ourhealth system is the assurances that I have received from the Premier and the Treasurer that whatevermoney is needed in relation to the Morris inquiry will be provided.


This budget is, indeed, the best ever for Queensland and congratulations are due to ourTreasurer, Terry Mackenroth. There is something in this budget for everyone and it reinforces thisgovernment’s commitment to govern for all Queenslanders. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr ROWELL (Hinchinbrook—NPA) (11.23 am): Queensland is enjoying a buoyant financialposition due to a number of external factors that have added to the state’s coffers. The windfall in GSTlast year and the predicted continuance of a high level of receipts again in the 2005-06 financial yearhas been of immense benefit to the state. Considering that the Premier berated the introduction of theGST, it is interesting to note that Premier Beattie and Treasurer Hamill were the first cabs off the rank tosign up to the Howard government’s new tax that was benefiting the states. This provides all the stateswith a substantial gain and is now assisting their economies.

Low interest rates were maintained by the federal Reserve Bank, instigating confidence in thebusiness sector which brought down unemployment to five per cent across Australia. Not to be behindthe door when taking credit for the federal government’s management of the economy, the Premierclaims credit for the current 5.3 per cent unemployment rate in Queensland.

With property values escalating in the southern states, many people who were cashed up afterdisposing their assets found their way north and started a buying frenzy which, in many cases, doubledproperty values in Queensland. Once again, through no reason that can be attributed to the Beattiegovernment yet again, money flowed into Treasury from the enormous duty generated from the inflatedproperty values. The coal and mining boom came and the government cashed in by way ofunanticipated levels. Land tax is also a major source of government revenue, although therecent amendment will curb its excesses.

Then there is the battlers, battling against unbeatable odds, who feed the poker machines, addingto higher than anticipated levels of receipt to top up the Treasury’s pocket. As the government battlesfrom inquiry to inquiry in the running of Queensland, it must be nice to know somebody up there islooking after it. While most government members have no background in operating a business, it mustgive a warm inner glow to see the money keep flowing in. It is good news that keeps happening forQueensland, even though the distribution is disproportionate for many regions of the state. It was only afew years ago that the squeeze was on corporations, with the government’s ‘stand up and deliver’ policyrequiring the corporations having to talk up the value of assets to borrow money to pay a dividend to theBeattie government because it was broke.

In relation to emergency services, the Minister for Emergency Services told the House that thedemand for ambulance services is growing at a rate of 10 per cent per annum and the QueenslandAmbulance Service is struggling in the face of these challenges. Therefore, it is disappointing to notethat funding for the ambulance services has only risen by six per cent in this budget. The QueenslandAmbulance Service does great work in the community but cannot be expected to sustain such a level ofunderfunding by the Beattie Labor government.

Members would also be aware of the increased role of the Counter Disaster and Rescue Service,given the uncertain global climate that we now find ourselves in. In the past year, the demands onCounter Disaster and Rescue Service staff have continued to grow in a way that many of us could nothave imagined. For this reason, I was most disappointed that the funding for the Counter Disaster andRescue Service has only increased by one per cent on last year’s budget. For all of us who rely on theCounter Disaster and Rescue Service’s ability to provide disaster mitigation and response services, weshould feel a little less safe and secure as a result of this budget.

It is a similar tale of underfunding for the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service. Given theextraordinary growth in Queensland’s population, particularly along the eastern seaboard and in thesouth-east corner, the need for expanded fire services has never been so apparent. Unfortunately, theBeattie government has ignored the growing demand upon our ‘firies’ and has delivered a fundingincrease of four per cent for the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service. Queensland is paying morein ambulance tax and fire levies than ever before, yet our essential emergency services are still notreceiving the funding that they deserve.

It should be noted by the House that the government reaped $224 million in fire levies and$108 million in ambulance levies in the 2004-05 financial year, and this is tipped to rise again in theforthcoming financial year. With reference to the budget for the portfolio of Employment and Training,while the capital works budget for Employment and Training has been given an increase—albeit muchof this is rolled over from this financial year, including close to a $20 million underspend for major capitalworks construction—there is no funding commitment in 2005-06 for new capital works for any ofQueensland’s four agricultural colleges. The funding provided for backlog maintenance for the collegesis the same as was provided last year, so there is no increase in maintenance funding, either. Fundingfor new infrastructure is vital to ensure that the campuses of the single colleges can continue to providethe required facilities to deliver a high standard of training now and into the future. These colleges havebeen a crucial training ground for our rural industries and contribute significantly to the localcommunities of Dalby, Emerald, Longreach, Burdekin and Mareeba.


Another aspect of this portfolio that I wish to make comment on is the budgeted funding directedtowards employment initiatives. Despite the Premier and the minister for employment and trainingsaying on many occasions that Queensland is and will continue to be the jobs hub of Australia, thebudget for employment initiatives for 2005-06 is only $200,000 more than was actually spent thisfinancial year. If we are to continue to assist the delivery of jobs across the state, including the need forspecific groups of job seekers, the government has to continue to commit funding for these strategies.

I want to speak about siam weed. When this House debated the Land Protection (Pest and StockRoute Management) Bill in April 2002, the Nationals raised a number of concerns about the proposedlegislation. Unfortunately, we have seen those concerns realised. During the debate three years ago, Isaid that it would be the land-holders who would suffer the consequences of the government’smisguided approach to protection of land from pests. Land-holders would be required to be responsiblefor the control of pests on their land or face tough penalties if they failed to comply. I was critical of thebill because it included a clause that specifically exempted the state from the same responsibilities. Thatclause was unfair then and it is unfair now.

Often the source of infestation comes from government land such as national parks and WorldHeritage areas. This act requires land-holders to wear the cost of controlling the pest on their propertybut allows the government to abrogate its responsibilities. It is a disgraceful double standard. It is aclassic buck-passing exercise by the Beattie Labor government, which has been hammering land-holders since it came to office. The most recent example of this situation that has been brought to myattention is the incidence of the DNRM issuing notices to land-holders for the control of the declaredpest siam weed at the site of the highly localised infestation along the Tully River in far-northQueensland.

The Queensland government DNRM fact sheet on siam weed identifies it as one of the world’sworst weeds, with the potential to spread across northern Australia and down the eastern coastline. Thefact sheet also claims that the DNRM strategic control team is working with other governmentdepartments and the community to eradicate this weed. The reality is that the DNRM is simply gettingaround issuing land-holders with notices to treat infestations of siam weed located on the banks of theTully River within 14 days or cop the penalty that applies. A threat of fines is hardly indicative of acooperative approach.

Siam weed in far-north Queensland—it is good to see the minister is in the House—is highlylocalised at locations along the Tully River and at nearby Bingle Bay. Given that the DNRM considers itto be one of the world’s worst weeds, would it not make sense for the Queensland government to takeimmediate and full control of a concerted effort to eradicate siam weed once and for all? Surely it isworth the effort to eradicate siam weed in this localised area in view of the potential for it to spreadacross northern and eastern Australia and to do serious damage to the environment in these areas.Unfortunately, the buck-passing provisions of the Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management)Act 2002 conveniently mean that the Beattie Labor government can continue to shirk its responsibilitiesand hide behind a law that punishes land-holders and puts Queensland’s environment at risk.

Although the Commonwealth government increased funding to the state for roads by $72 million,the Northern Statistical Division 45 had its already depressed budget from last year’s works programreduced from 5.6 per cent to 4.6 per cent. Had it not been for the federal government’s Roads toRecovery program over the last few years, many local roads would have fallen into disrepair and manycouncils would not have been able to keep on their drastically cut work force. In some cases, to avoidaccumulating debt, machinery had to be sold off. But, once again, the apportionment of funds tocouncils for the matching dollar for dollar transport infrastructure fund has declined from $61.2 million to$57.5 million. This is bad news for ratepayers who cannot afford to pay more rates because they aredrought stricken or, in the case of the sugar industry, still battling with adverse seasonal conditions anddepressed world prices.

The federal government recognised the difficulties facing people in north Queensland during thewetter months of the year, with the flooding of the Bruce Highway between Banyan Creek near Tully andCorduroy Creek, some 14 kilometres to the south. This area in the wet season causes major disruptionsto commercial vehicles and travellers. Last year traffic built up for kilometres waiting for the water tosubside. The federal transport minister and Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson, promised$80 million last year and this was confirmed in the federal budget. Some $843,000 will be spent on theplanning process at 30 June 2005 and $2.851 million will go towards the completion of planning andpreliminary work this next financial year. The remaining $76.306 million will be spent post 2005-06 forthe completion of the work. It is a bit rich that this allocation is included in the state budget. I have metwith the Department of Main Roads and the planning consultants and will continue to do so on a regularbasis to keep up to date with the planning process. This project will be a major benefit to the whole ofnorth Queensland, and I have been pleased to have had success with lobbying and the allocation offunds for its construction.

About three years ago it became apparent that the Ingham Hospital had exceeded its use-bydate. There was no further point in spending funds to extend its life for more than three or four years.After visits by the then shadow minister for health, Fiona Simpson, the Nationals pledged to commit


$12 million for its replacement. In the last budget the government made an allocation of $11 million forits replacement, which confirmed that the facility was not suited to further repairs of a major nature. Thisyear’s budget made an allocation and upgraded the government’s commitment to $22.1 million after areassessment of the costs and the requirements of the health service in the district.

There are definite prospects that the new facility could take in patients from Townsville andThuringowa for minor surgery, which could relieve the pressure caused by the growth in those cities.That has occurred up to date, and it has worked extremely well. Planning is well under way. Some$12 million will be spent this financial year, with the remaining $10 million allocated post 2005-06. It isexpected that the maternity ward will be re-established with additional services to cater for the needs ofthe Ingham community and beyond.

Innisfail Hospital has been on the drawing board for a number of years. It is a critical health facilityfor far-north Queensland, servicing communities to the north, south and west of the town. In 2004-05 thebudget showed a cost of $23.2 million, but this has been upgraded to $38.285 million. Some$4.441 million will be spent to 30 June 2005, with a further $20.286 million in the next financial year. Theremaining $13.558 million will be spent post 2005-06. This hospital will serve the needs of the Mulgraveelectorate and it also caters for the health care needs of people in the Hinchinbrook electorate down toEl Arish. Thanks to a strong community drive about five years ago which raised $100,000, theDepartment of Health installed five dialysis chairs. I am sure that the member for Mundingburra wouldbe aware of this. This number will be increased to eight when the new facility is built.

The Ingham Police Station, with a budget allocation of $4 million, will have $2.386 million spenton it by 30 June 2005. The building is well advanced and should be completed in September, with theremaining $1.164 million to be spent at the conclusion. This will provide an up-to-date and much-improved facility compared to the station that has served the needs of the district for years.

The Ingham special education facility is being moved to the Ingham State School at a cost of$414,000. Some $37,000 has been spent to date, with the remaining $377,000 to be spent nextfinancial year. These facilities are essential for disabled and intellectually disabled students. There hasbeen a tendency to integrate those students into schools before adequate facilities have been madeavailable. I want to stress this point because this is a major problem. In the past no provision has beenmade for the ramps and special toilet facilities that are absolutely essential for disabled and intellectuallydisabled children. The Ingham State High School is a classic example of this. Negotiations are underway at the present time to deal with this issue. Tully high has been allocated $520,000 foradditional amenities. Some $5,000 had been spent to date. A further $285,000 is to be spent next year,and a further $30,000 will be spent post 2005-06.

Throughout the electorate a number of community facilities are required for cultural,entertainment and information services. The Cardwell shire is badly in need of a community hall. Ameeting was held of the likely user organisations. The council has engaged a consultant to carry out ananalysis. The current facilities are not suited for a wide range of functions held in the Cardwell shire andupgrading them is not practical.

Mission Beach is lobbying for an aquatic complex to provide safe swimming for members of thelocal community and tourists. For a number of years funds have been raised through the aquaticcarnival, but substantial funds are required through sporting grants. The Hinchinbrook shire is intendingto build a tourist information centre, but to date it has received inadequate funding from government.The district is totally dependent on the sugar industry, and tourism is seen as an alternative. It isextremely important that this facility is built. I know that the current council is coming to grips with it.

Mr WALLACE (Thuringowa—ALP) (11.43 am): I ask honourable members to cast their mindsback to some of the most infamous apologists in recent history. Two former parliamentarians spring tomind, like former British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and his ‘peace in our day’ claim aftersharing a cup of tea in Munich with a nice chap called Adolf Hitler or that Tory pin-up boy Bob Menziesand his insistence that selling pig iron to the Japanese before the outbreak of the war was okay. Well, itappears that our own parliament has spawned another bunch of conservative apologists.

The mob opposite claim that this year’s ripper of a state budget is in some way due to thelargesse of John Howard and his merry bunch of men in Canberra. Has anyone ever heard suchsycophantic drivel in their life? What a load of poppycock! Peter Costello contributed as much to ourstate’s best budget as the Bjelke-Petersen government contributed to police ethics. Queensland is insuch a strong position because of the hard work done by the Treasurer and the Premier. Indeed, I wouldgo as far as saying that it should be Canberra saying thank you to the Beattie government for runningsuch a strong economy rather than the other way round. I suppose that those members opposite willbarrack for the Blues next Wednesday night, so strong does their dislike for our state seem to be.

Mr Reeves interjected. Mr WALLACE: That is right. The electorate of Thuringowa has done very well out of this budget.

Let us have a look at just some of the wins. The Thuringowa City Council will receive $1.5 million toconstruct a new aquatic facility at Northern Beaches. This area is growing very rapidly, with many youngfamilies moving there. Thuringowa City Council and the developer of the land where the centre will be


located will also help fund this $4.65 million project. It will incorporate a 50-metre swimming pool, toddlerpool, learn to swim pool, lagoon area, amenities, reception and kiosk.

As honourable members know, I am passionate about our state’s best Rugby League footballteam, the North Queensland Cowboys. Young Cowboys will get a boost with $41,832 allocated to theTownsville and District Junior Rugby League to help construct a four-tiered covered seating area forplayers and officials. Some $17,500 has been allocated to the Thuringowa City Council to develop astrategic sport and recreation plan. Then there is $2.42 million for the new Thuringowa Health Centre,which will cost about $13.4 million in total. Some $96,000 has been allocated for school-age care atvarious local schools. The upgrade of the Kirwan Police Station will continue with $791,000 for the$1.35 million project. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been set aside for various roadworksincluding new traffic lights on Upper Ross River Road and at Hervey’s Range Road.

I represent one of the youngest electorates in this place. That means that Thuringowa has morethan its fair share of school-age children, so I am pleased to advise that this budget looks after ourschools. Whilst the list of wins is too long to read today, I will mention just a few. There is $1.36 millionfor Kirwan high, one of our state’s biggest schools, for classroom upgrades; $727,000 for the BohlevaleState School; $93,000 for Northern Beaches high for multipurpose courts; $45,000 for Weir school; and$40,000 for Willows State School. Continued remediation works on the Ross River Dam receive$33 million. The state is contributing $67.5 million to this important project.

There is much more for Thuringowa than I will mention in my speech today. This budget isobviously a big winner. I will conclude, however, on one point. I would especially like to thank theMinister for Communities and Disability Services for the $1.5 million for a brand new BohlevaleCommunity Centre. This facility will replace the old, run-down house that the service currently operatesfrom. The minister has personally visited the current operation and viewed the new site: thanks, Warren.I wholeheartedly commend this bill to the House.

Miss ELISA ROBERTS (Gympie—Ind) (11.48 am): It gives me great pleasure to be able tospeak to this budget in a positive way and to be able to articulate the things that my electorate willbenefit from rather than having to bemoan what we do not have. The role of a member of parliament isto ensure that the electorate they represent is provided with the services and infrastructure that itdeserves. I am happy to say that my electorate has done rather well in this budget. I believe that thehighlights include the $7.8 million towards the replacement of the Gympie Police Station and watch-house and the $1.7 million for the new Gympie Ambulance Station.

Since my election the Gympie Ambulance Station has been allocated an extra five paramedics.The Minister for Emergency Services has recently announced that nine new paramedics will beemployed in the north coast region. I plan to continue lobbying the minister to ensure that the Gympieelectorate gets its fair quota, particularly for the Tin Can Bay area. In last year’s budget we were onlyallocated $100,000 for the Gympie station. However, we actually received $450,000. Considering theyears of intense lobbying, it is wonderful that the government seems to be making up for lost time inregard to the money being allocated for the station’s completion.

Still on policing, this budget sees Rainbow Beach being allocated $432,000 for a much-neededneighbourhood police beat and $400,000 for the completion of the Tin Can Bay station. One area I amvery impressed with, particularly in light of recent media attention, is the Beattie government’s responseto the need for police to be trained in how to deal with people with a mental illness. Historically, caring forthe mentally ill was never officially a part of police training but now, given the demand for mental healthservices and the limited number of beds available in public hospitals, particularly in rural and regionalareas, police are facing situations and people whose needs are extremely high but they have not beentrained to provide the care required. The government, in partnership with Queensland Health and theDepartment of Emergency Services, will see funding allocated for mental health crisis interventionteams and the training of 1,200 police officers in how to handle the mentally ill.

Again in the area of policing, and of particular interest to myself, is the State Crime OperationsCommand initiated project with the RSPCA to examine the link between instances of animal cruelty anddomestic violence. There has been a great deal of evidence that acts of animal cruelty by a child couldindicate a predisposition to violent behaviour in later life.

This budget also outlines details of reports and investigations which are to receive continuedfunding, such as the review into the operation of speed cameras. The review has been examining thelength of time that a driver’s behaviour is influenced once they have passed an operational speedcamera site. This phenomenon is known as the halo effect and the research is due to be finalised in thenear future. Another project being funded is the broken windows project, which is testing the hypothesisthat the use of visual law enforcement can reduce overall crime rates as well as reducing the numberand impact of fatal and serious road crashes. I am sure that the people of my electorate would supportany research which could identify reasons for accidents occurring, with the view that prevention is betterthan cure.

On the subject of speed cameras, I have to mention the degree of scepticism that some people inmy electorate have in relation to the use of speed cameras, with many believing them to be purely forthe sake of revenue raising and that they are taking police away from their real jobs of solving crime. I


feel that one way to alleviate some of this doubt would be to increase the use of automated cameraswhich do not require a police presence like those I remember were used substantially in New SouthWales when I lived there. This would prevent the number of police hours being used up sitting besidethe road.

The budget papers rightly mention the fact that with the current trend in population growth insouth-east Queensland, traffic incident management will continue to be a significant issue for the policeservice. And finally—a point I wish to highlight to all Queenslanders—speed on our roads contributed tomore than half of the total number of road crashes over the last 12 months as the primary causal factor.I find it amazing that people will do all sorts of things for their health, such as limiting their fat and carbintake, take up exercise, give up smoking, but then go out on the road and do 120kph in a 100kph zone.What is that about? Speed kills, full stop. There is no point being healthy if you get on the road and drivelike a lunatic.

The budget also includes over $4 million for 15 schools in my electorate for maintenance, andclose to $4 million for transport infrastructure. The provision of equity for people without access to aprivate vehicle and access in rural and remote areas is much needed and I hope this funding will includethe Gympie electorate, as the lack of public transport and frequency of public transport is a major issueand, until it is addressed, will continue to impede the extent of growth which could be achieved for theregion.

As a quick aside to the budget but still on the topic of transport, I am grateful to the Minister forTransport for meeting yesterday with me and senior staff of the Mary Valley Rattler in order to discuss anumber of issues which are aimed at ensuring the continued success of the beloved Rattler, particularlyin light of the despicable behaviour of Warren Truss of the federal National Party who, as part of his lastre-election campaign, presented the Rattler with a cheque for over half a million dollars, only to take itoff them once he was re-elected. No community organisation deserves to be treated so appallingly. Tomake such a substantial promise, to publicise it and then renege on that promise is beyondcomprehension and the height of arrogance.

An honourable member: Sack him!Miss ELISA ROBERTS: I wish. The problem south-east Queensland is facing in regard to a lack

of affordable housing is nowhere less apparent than in my electorate. Gympie has been facing ahousing crisis for a few years now, with low-income earners the most severely effected. Much of theproblem has arisen in part from the fact that there was a general housing boom, the consequential rentrises and the fact that the population is increasing at a rapid rate. Whilst I am not an expert, I haveracked my brain trying to come up with viable solutions to the problem. I am of the view that some of thecurrent dilemma stems from the fact that there has been a dramatic turn away from high-density publichousing and the block of unit type of housing that was popular in the seventies.

I actually grew up very close to public housing estates and had many friends who lived in them.There were a number of problems associated with this type of housing in Sydney—I am not aware of theextent of this type of housing being built in Queensland—and the social problems were quite significantand included high levels of crime emanating from the ghetto type environments which evolved. Thatbeing said, at least people had somewhere to live. If there were some way that we could prevent thistype of environment from occurring then perhaps part of the problem would be solved. Sadly, there willprobably always be some sort of stigma associated with public housing, or housing commission flats asthey were known when I grew up, and this is one social aspect that needs to be addressed. The realityof the current situation is that people are living longer, way past retirement age, and are on a reducedincome, and more and more people are relying on social security which means that there are morepeople who cannot afford the private rental market. Realistically, no government can be expected tohouse all of these people. Unfortunately, many of the problems are social and governments of anypersuasion are not able to legislate for this.

In order to deal with the rising level of housing stress the government has allocated $235.5 millionto a number of agencies to assist the homeless and those at threat of homelessness. As I said, nogovernment could afford to build a home for every single person on a low income. In order to appreciatethe extent of the problem I was listening to a speech by former Prime Minister Paul Keating the otherday—purely by accident, I might add—and he was talking about the housing situation in Sydney—In order to house the growing population, 25,000 new dwellings will have to be built each single year. Now, I don’t care whetherthe Labor Party or the Liberal Party is in government, no government could realistic afford to build to this extent.

Whilst we continue to allow people who are not genuine to receive benefits then there will behousing issues and housing crisis in the future. The housing crisis is a difficult one because it is notsimply about building houses; we really need to delve deeper and look at the type of people who areexperiencing housing crisis. It is often a vicious cycle for those people. To begin with, they may beunemployed or they may be single with a child. If we could address the social issues which preventthese people from finding employment then we could probably see more people who are able to workand therefore afford private rental. I see examples of this every day. If people were able to get their teethfixed or replaced in less than four years, they might have more confidence and be in a better position tobe employable. If single mothers were encouraged to go to TAFE and were able to leave their children


in a creche at the TAFE then these women would at least have some sort of chance to get ahead. Ifpeople on drugs could get access to drug rehab and beds in our hospitals then we might have morepeople able to work. But until these services are in place we are going to continue to have thousands ofpeople who are just unemployable, reliant on welfare and therefore looking for cheap housing. Inresponse to the housing crisis I support the allocation of $50 million for the provision of boarding houseaccommodation for single people and I am particularly happy about the allocation of $4 million for 25new units in Gympie.

The budget for health is a little lacklustre and I imagine this is partly due to the fact that no-oneknows what the outcome will be in Bundaberg. The government is no doubt hanging on to as muchmoney as it can, especially if they are found liable for nearly 100 wrongful deaths. If the relatives ofthese people get together under one umbrella and sue, this government will need to have some cash inreserve.

That being said, I am very grateful for the $5.3 million to complete the Gympie HospitalEmergency Department upgrade. The hospital upgrade so far looks fantastic and is something we areall very proud of. However, I am slightly concerned about the proposed health hotline which hasreceived $6.9 million in this budget. I am fearful that the provision of health information and triageservices over the telephone could end in a fiasco not unlike that which happened in Bundaberg. Howcan anyone be diagnosed over the phone? How will these phones be manned when we do not haveenough clinical personnel as it is? People are not always able to articulate how they feel over the phone,or they may downplay what they are feeling. I know of one example where an ambulance call centreoperator cancelled an ambulance due to this and another had to be called because the patient wasgenuinely seriously ill. To triage a person over the phone could be extremely difficult, particularly assome illnesses can have similar symptoms. This is an area where mistakes cannot afford to be madeand even one wrong diagnosis and death is too many. I am surprised that this government could takesuch a risk, especially following recent events in this state. On the other hand, imagine all thehypochondriacs taking up the phone lines or those who are lonely and just want someone to talk to. Thiswhole idea is irresponsible and could end up being very dangerous. I hope that the minister willreassess his commitment to this project.

Morale is so low at the moment in the Department of Health that money should not be redirectedto new experiments such as those just mentioned but put straight back into lifting morale. Nurses do notfeel valued the way that they should be. Nurses aids should be brought back into the system to ease theburden of our nurses. When a patient is unhappy, nursing staff are unhappy because they are the oneswhom patients take their frustrations out on. Prior to Gympie Hospital employing the current districtmanager—who is fabulous—nurses were so afraid to come to me that they were actually askingpatients to come to see me when they were discharged.

If the minister or anyone denies that an oppressive culture has been allowed to grow within thedepartment then they are living in fantasy land. I do not blame the current minister for this culture, as itwas well and truly entrenched during the time of his predecessor who, I might add, has been very quietthroughout this whole disaster. If only she had believed those of us who tried to tell her what was goingon. As time has shown, contrary to her belief, we were not playing politics; we were trying to make hersee what was really going on.

As time is running out I will touch on some of the things which I would still like to see occur withinmy electorate. They include the raising of Borumba Dam which has been promised repeatedly, an endto the use of drinking water to flush toilets, a publicly funded nursing home for the elderly, a publiclyfunded home for people with a disability whose parents have passed away and end up in old agehomes, which are not appropriate, and an increase in funding for people who provide transport for thosewho have no means of getting to medical appointments.

One area I am disappointed about is that of tourism. I not believe my electorate was mentionedonce. I am left to wonder how the minister responsible for tourism will be assisting my electorate in liftingits profile as a tourist destination.

Whilst the $2.8 million which has been allocated to people within the Gympie electorate who havea disability is appreciated, it really will not go very far under the current system of how it is disseminatedthrough lifestyle support packages. This system does not work because it leaves too many people withno support at all. I feel this should be more of a combined state-federal responsibility as the needs ofthese people are so great and, in most cases, will never be alleviated.

People with a severe disability and their carers need all the care that we can provide for their livesare more difficult than many of us could ever imagine. If we can at the very least ensure that there areenough respite hours for carers and basic assistance for the disabled, we will be able to make an oftenunbearably sad situation slightly more bearable for carers, who are such brave and strong people andwhose levels of endurance are so admirable.

Finally, I thank the government for what it has provided for my electorate. It certainly feelswonderful when I have good news to convey to the exceptional people whom I represent.

Interruption.


PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Behaviour of MembersMiss ELISA ROBERTS (Gympie—Ind) (12.02 pm), by leave: I note Mr Acting Speaker’s

statement in the House this morning regarding an incident which occurred last night. I have beenprovided with a statement by the Deputy Speaker who was in the chair last night. I will be responding indetail to Mr Acting Speaker. Whilst my recollection of events differs from those provided to the DeputySpeaker, in order to resolve the matter I apologise for any offence caused.



Resumed. Hon. DM WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) (12.02 pm): I congratulate the Treasurer on the many

achievements of this budget. I do not want to rehearse the many positives already covered thoroughlyby honourable members, nor will I spend much time on the opposition’s sterile argument that the budgetmoneys come from Canberra. Whoever collected it, the money came from Queensland taxpayers andthe size of the tax yield itself attests to the strength of the Queensland economy.

I sometimes wonder, though, whether at some time in the future we could achieve even more withmore sophisticated economic tools. When we think about it, the tools that are used in the construction ofbudgets in all jurisdictions of this country and in developed democracies are much more rudimentarythan they need to be. Specifically, we quantify the costs of our initiatives but we do not quantify thebenefits.

At budget review committees in any jurisdictions ministers and public servants will have beforethem information as to exactly how much it will cost to employ additional teachers, police officers orwelfare workers and, in some years and in some jurisdictions, how much would be saved bydisemploying them. The benefits of employing additional teachers, police officers or welfare workers arepalpable and a proposal to spend money on such services is seen as an undoubted benefit.

What is not available to proponents of such expenditure is the statistical argument as to theextent of the benefit. Put shortly, they have no argument of the same logical form as that of opponents ofthe expenditure—namely, that it will cost a certain number of dollars. Yet expenditure on services doeshave a quantifiable benefit.

The United Nations and the World Bank quantify these things. The United Nations humandevelopment index ranks countries according to the number of its citizens who complete schooling, therate of infant mortality and the proportion of the population who reach the age of 80. Australia does wellon the human development index.

Expenditure on services promotes human development to an extent indicatively quantifiable, butin no jurisdictions do policy makers have such statistics before them when they decide whether to incurthe cost of the expenditure. They have before them an equation with exact numbers on the costs side ofthe equals sign and only good intentions on the benefits side.

The World Bank has ranked the wealth of nations in a way very different from the estimations oftreasuries around this country and, indeed, around the world. In the 1990s the World Bank producedsome papers which not only estimated the productive capital of nations—that is, the gross domesticproduct figures usually deployed by treasuries—but also estimated the value of a nation’s humancapital, natural capital and social capital.

Quantifying these things leads to very interesting consequences. The harvesting of a forestappears in the black column of the gross domestic product accounts—that is, as income—but it appearsin the red column of accounts of natural capital; that is, as an asset loss. Such accounts, thoughrecognised by the World Bank, have not made their way into the databases of budget reviewcommittees in this country or anywhere else in the world that I know of.

What is lacking is a set of economic tools that reflect the fact that what governments should beaiming at is the improvement of the quality of life of their citizens. The pursuit of that objective is left tothe goodwill and compassion of budget review committees around the country. The amount of thosevirtues varies alarmingly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, from party to party and from year to year. In theyears to come, Queensland might be a good place to develop some smarter economic tools that betterserve the real purpose of government, which is to improve the quality of life of its citizens.


Mr McARDLE (Caloundra—Lib) (12.16 pm): It is with pleasure that I rise to make a contributionto the budget debate. I will start by making some comments on the Department of Emergency Services.Firstly, I note that in the 2004-05 financial year the capital acquisition statement showed $10.65 millionbeing allocated to construct ambulance stations whereas this year’s budget documentation shows thatonly $7.74 million was actually spent.

This has resulted in an estimate for the 2005-06 year of $19.4 million for the same purpose. Inessence, that is almost twice that for 2004-05. What this leads to is that this minister has allowed hisdepartment to fall behind in providing essential services to Queenslanders and because of that we areall going to have to pay larger sums of money to acquire what should have been put in place well over12 months ago.

If we further consider the budget for the department and look at the revenue paid to thedepartment, we see that between the years 2004-05 and 2005-06 the federal contribution to revenuehas increased by 27.5 per cent. This government’s revenue has increased by only 6.6 per cent. TheCommonwealth’s contribution to counterdisaster and rescue services between 2004-05 and 2005-06has increased by 10.8 per cent while this government’s contribution is up by only 5.5 per cent.

When we consider the Fire and Rescue Service we see that the federal government revenueincrease has been 56 per cent while the state government’s has been a paltry 7.4 per cent. I am certainthe minister is overjoyed that the federal government is able to assist him financially in meeting theneeds of Queenslanders.

I would like to now turn to the question of Caloundra itself and touch, in small detail, on theSunshine Coast region as a whole. Caloundra is one component of a region well known as the SunshineCoast. Depending upon whom one talks to, it is comprised of either three local government areas orfive. Irrespective, this is a region that is growing in importance economically. It is becoming a greateconomic region in its own right within the south-east corner of this great state.

In my opinion, Caloundra has been dealt a rather pathetic hand in this budget. There are anumber of matters that need to be addressed which include the upgrade of Caloundra Road from theBruce Highway to Pierce Avenue, thereby making that stretch four lanes and thus making CaloundraRoad itself into the CBD four lanes all the way. This is becoming critical when one considers the linkbetween that and the new industrial complex which has been listed in the budget for development overthe next financial year at a cost of some $10 million. The importance of Caloundra Road is simply theaccess that it provides to the industrial complex itself. That access is at the intersection of Caloundraand Racecourse roads. That intersection is at right angles and poses a major risk to traffic enteringeither road in its current formation. In fact, I recently held a meeting in my office with officials from thedepartments of main roads and state development, the local divisional councillor, the directors ofCorbould Park racecourse and those who are keen to set up businesses in the industrial complex. Theunanimous concern was the necessity to get the intersection constructed urgently, otherwise trafficwould be accessing the industrial complex by way of Pierce Avenue or creating a dangerous situation atthe existing intersection of Caloundra and Racecourse roads. Having been advised at the meeting that Iwould receive a package of the proposal to construct the intersection within three weeks of the meeting,which was held on 3 May 2005, I have not at this point in time received that document.

I also note that in the MPS of the transport minister Caloundra Road is not referred to, though ofcourse it is detailed for completion in the infrastructure document of April this year for 2008-09. The realconcern with that is that, if the intersection is not upgraded, even on a temporary basis, then there willbe delay in people moving into the industrial complex not because the complex is not available butbecause of the risk associated with the intersection and the hostility that has been generated fromresidents and other people and proprietors of businesses who reside and work on Pierce Avenue. Themajor concern is the exceptionally large volume of heavy traffic that will be using Pierce Avenue,creating a potential disaster area with the real risk of injury to person or even loss of life.

Let us then turn to Caloundra Hospital. I note that under the infrastructure plan CaloundraHospital is to be expanded by spending $50 million over the next four financial years. The budgetshows, however, only an increase of $2 million in this coming financial year, leaving $48 million to beexpended over the following three financial years. This whole issue smells very much like a secondCaloundra Road. One matter of real concern for the coast is the blow-out in costings for the SunshineCoast ambulatory and community centre. In the 2004-05 budget figures, the cost was set at $9.7 millionwhereas it appears in this year’s figures at a cost of $14.7 million—a difference of some $5 million. Thegovernment has stated that it would spend $1 million this financial year whereas only $20,000 has beenexpended. The cost of this facility will only get more expensive if it is to proceed. The health minister hasagain ignored the Sunshine Coast in relation to this issue. I also urge the education minister to moveforward the replacement time schedule for asbestos ceilings in schools. Ten years is much too long andthis is a substance, as we all know, that can kill with the smallest exposure. Only one school on theSunshine Coast region will be dealt with over the next financial year, and that is simply an appallingstatement as to how we care for the children of the Sunshine Coast.


There are a number of areas, though, where Caloundra has received funding and for which I amgrateful. The first one is the upgrade and fitout of the new Caloundra West State College at a cost of$11.62 million; a share of the $17.3 million for new and upgraded public housing, which is badly neededon the Sunshine Coast, and funding for which must continue; and, further, a share of funds to bolsterchild protection. It will be a matter of watching this space on this issue, as the recent history of the northcoast region shows that it has been poorly served by this department. There is a large degree of ill willon the coast towards the department and it will take a lot of effort to change that opinion.

I want to now move into the future for the Sunshine Coast. Yesterday at the Innovation Centre abook entitled Surprisingly Smart was launched, and I table a copy of that book for members of thechamber. The foreward to the book by Colin Graham states in part—The region’s civic and business leaders are united in their commitment to diversifying the region’s economy and encouraging thegrowth of knowledge based businesses. We are confident that the hundreds of existing smaller innovative businesses will bejoined by a steady flow of businesses of all sizes.

While not taking away from the important industries of tourism and construction, the future of thecoast must lie in diversification of its economic base. We must establish new industries that attractcapital and income into the region and not go any other way. As Professor Karren Wooley stated, weneed to establish businesses that are ‘lean and green’.

The publication I referred to provides a snapshot of what is available not just to businesses on thecoast but to all who desire a combination of lifestyle while sustaining a growing business. Two suchbusinesses are Proscribe and Maverick Musicals. The former prepares documents for pharmaceutical,biotechnology and academic clients that need to have new drugs approved for sale and to educatedoctors whilst the latter is Australia’s largest publisher of original music and theatre productions, withover 80 plays and musicals in print and being performed in Australia, New Zealand, the UK, the USA,Canada and Asia. These businesses are the future of the coast.

If we are going to develop the coast to grow, then we must keep younger people there. If we wantyoung families to settle on the coast, then this budget is nowhere near the result we need. There is astatement often used by this government with which it brands itself—the Smart State. It cannot claim atitle like that when the Moreton region receives only 13.2 per cent of the capital works in this budget. Irefer to the headline of the Sunshine Coast Daily today under the banner ‘25-year boom, 5000 homes ayear needed’. An article by Gordon Clark reads in part as follows—To accommodate the growth, Mr Salt said 4000 new dwellings would need to be built on the coast each year between now and2011, the rate jumping to 5000 a year during the 2020s.

So let us be real in relation to the budget and the planning for the future of the Sunshine Coast.The infrastructure plan states that by 2025-26 almost $6 billion will be spent on transport infrastructure.This budget is a pathetic start to that goal with no time lines being drawn in. The transport minister hasfailed the coast yet again.

If one considers the health component of the infrastructure plan, $607 million needs to be spent inthe next 20 years, yet almost nothing is to be spent over the next 12 months. The health minister has notprovided for the growth of the coast yet again. One could go on and on as to how this government, whilesaying the plan is on paper, has simply been unable or unwilling to provide for the coast, and certainlynot for Queenslanders. The GST component of this budget is enormous, with Queensland receiving$7.4 billion in 2004-05 and set to receive $7.7 billion in 2005-06. In 2004-05 this resulted in $798 millionextra and in 2005-06 Queensland will receive an extra $595 million, thus in two years this governmentwill receive an extra $1.4 billion in GST revenue. The government, however, continues to ignoreCaloundra, continues to ignore the Sunshine Coast and, on the whole, does not care.

The Liberal Party, however, understands that we need to build for the future and, in doing so,acknowledges the need to assist a cross-section of our community. We have put in place plans toreduce a number of taxes to provide that relief. We have done that at a time when the federalgovernment has had to drag this government to the table to get it to relinquish $42 million in 2005-06.This has occurred despite an agreement that it would do so and against an extra windfall of GST of$595 million.

I want to touch very quickly on the issue of seniors. The budget barely acknowledges theirexistence as a distinct and important group. The issues affecting them and which mark them as adistinct group such as general health and aged care, housing, employment and grandparenting arebarley touched. Again, this Smart State has shown that, although it has the words, it does not have aheart. This budget, if it is meant to set the stage for the future, has no drive, no ambition and fails thepeople of this great state. The decisions have now in essence been passed on to future generations andthis government has lost the chance of history judging it as a government with vision. This government,at best, will be seen as never pushing the barrow of future prosperity. The timidity with which itapproaches the future is seen in stark contrast to the drive of John Howard, who continues to push theboundaries and sees a country with enormous potential. When this government determines to use thesame vision and the same drive, it might be able to claim the title of the Smart State. But this budget willnot get it anywhere near it.


Mr REEVES (Mansfield—ALP) (12.19 pm): The only good thing that I can say about the previousmember is that he represents a great area. The member referred to the Howard government’s vision ofcutting services. That is really visionary!

It is my pleasure to speak in support of the Beattie government’s eighth budget. As a resident ofthe suburb of Wishart, which lies in the very heart of the Mansfield electorate, I am thankful that thisbudget will deliver real results for local residents. Over 40,000 Mansfield residents will be affected bythis budget. The result for each resident will be the same: better hospitals, superior schools and stronginfrastructure today in preparation for the future.

Some of the major highlights of this year’s budget include $7.7 million invested by Energex tocontinue works on a second 33/11kV module substation at Upper Mount Gravatt and the installation ofcapacitor banks at the Runcorn bulk supply substation. An amount of $2.4 million is allocated tocontinue the relocation of the Mount Gravatt fire station, which turns 50 this year. It is moving to a newhome at the corner of Mount Gravatt-Capalaba Road and Newnham Road at Wishart. An amount of$1.78 million is allocated to community organisations under the Home and Community Care program.This program provides support and maintenance services for eligible people at home to prevent theirearly admission to residential care.

An amount of $1.32 million has been allocated to continue installing guardrails on the GatewayArterial between the Pacific Motorway and Mount Gravatt-Capalaba Road. An amount of $1.05 millionhas been allocated for renewal of 32 public rental houses at Rochedale South. I have lobbied theminister strongly on this matter. I really appreciate the minister achieving this allocation in the PublicWorks and Housing budget.

An amount of $450,000 has been allocated to Mansfield State School for a major classroomupgrade, including $36,000 for a fit-out to support multimedia initiatives. This funding has come from theSmart State Building Fund and was announced prior to the last state election. It will be great forMansfield State School to have these multimedia facilities. An amount of $326,000 has been allocatedunder the Triple R maintenance and asbestos roof replacement program for repainting at Wishart StateSchool and removing the three asbestos roofs at Rochedale State School.

An amount of $340,000 has been allocated to constructing roads and drainage in the Mansfieldelectorate. An amount of $76,000 has been allocated for continued funding for the South BrisbaneTactical Crime Squad, which targets known crime hot spots with a strong emphasis on investigatingproperty crime and drug offences.

The Mansfield electorate will share in the Beattie government’s record $5.35 billion contribution toHealth. Mansfield residents will benefit from funding for many initiatives and services, including$6.83 million to continue the Mater Hospital redevelopment, which has a total project cost of$111 million. The Mater Hospital is located on Brisbane’s south side. It is great that this government issupporting the Mater Hospital in terms of its provision of public health services. An amount of$3.94 million has been allocated to the Princess Alexandra Hospital Health Service District for medicalequipment, including anaesthetic units, electrocardiograph machines and transmitters, medical videocamera equipment, patient monitors, sanitisers and a vital signs monitor. An amount of $1.04 million hasbeen allocated to manage demand for services in the QEII Hospital Health Service District. An amountof $1.1 million has been allocated to the Logan-Beaudesert Health Service District for medicalequipment, including X-ray units and operating tables. An amount of $768,000 has been allocated to theQEII Hospital Health Service District for medical equipment, including autoclaves, dental chairs, dentalunits and dental lights. An amount of $1.45 million has been allocated to manage demand for servicesat the Mater Hospital Health Service District.

This budget has delivered significant funding for schools in the Mansfield electorate. I havealready spoken about a couple of areas that have received funding. The government’s record$4.765 billion investment in Education demonstrates that our classrooms and the schoolchildren withinthem are vital to ensuring that Queensland continues to be the Smart State. Schools in the Mansfieldelectorate will reap the benefits of Queensland’s largest ever educational capital works program with$454.1 million going towards improving infrastructure. Major funding for the Mansfield electorateincludes an allocation of $86,000 to Rochedale State School to complete an electrical upgrade,including $26,000 for fit-out, with a total project cost of $90,000; $70,000 to Rochedale South StateSchool to complete an electrical upgrade, including $21,000 for fit-out, with a total project cost of$73,000; $34,000 to Mansfield State School to upgrade the play area for landscaping; $78,000 for high-priority maintenance related to reflooring at the Mansfield State High School and Mount Gravatt SpecialSchool; and $45,000 for school-age care at Mansfield State School, Mount Gravatt East State School,Rochedale South State School, Rochedale State School, St Catherine’s School, St Peter’s School andWishart State School.

After many years of ridicule, our southern cousins have finally realised that Queensland is thebest place in Australia in which to live. If members want to see an example of that, they should look atthe massive influx of residents to Queensland. We are going to have another massive influx of residentsover the next 20 years. I am proud to be part of a state government that is thinking about the future and


is establishing the infrastructure that will ensure that Queenslanders can move forward while welcomingmany new residents.

We have the plan and we have the vision. Obviously the member for Caloundra has not beenreading these budget documents. This budget starts putting that plan into action by allocating the fundsto it.

Within the next 10 years there will be another bridge standing next to the Gateway Bridge; aworld-class education precinct linking schools, vocational education and higher learning at South Bank;and another link in the highly impressive busway network. Members might not realise that I am the No. 1ticket holder for the South-East Busway. The busway will be further extended with the construction of anew busway at Boggo Road. It must be a sign that Queensland is moving in the right direction that thearea that once housed some of Queensland’s most notorious criminals will become a vital link inconnecting south-side residents to the Princess Alexandra Hospital and the University of Queensland.

This budget provides real results for real Queenslanders—people like the residents of theMansfield electorate. As always, it is the people who will decide whether or not this budget is successful.I will continue to work hard to ensure that the residents of the Mansfield electorate continue to get thevery best from this budget and this state government.

Mr CHRIS FOLEY (Maryborough—Ind) (12.26 pm): This week when my local media called mefor my reaction to the budget I said that, as a regional electorate, like Oliver Twist we always want more.Generally speaking, I am not very happy with the level of support that the Maryborough electoratereceived in the state budget. However, I must temper that comment with the fact that last NovemberMaryborough’s EDI and Bombardier was awarded a $212 million contract. Also, Maryborough received$10 million in a previous budget. So I guess what goes around comes around. The $32.4 millioncontract for 24 new rail carriages, which features so prominently on the front page of the regional budgetstatement, seems to be simply part of that $212 million contract that was announced last November.

In 2003 I said in my budget reply speech that the Maryborough electorate is thankful and positiveabout any new funding that comes its way. But it is entirely cynical about the leftovers from last night’sdinner being tossed into a casserole and being dished up again as a new meal, complete with glossyand expensive packaging. Announcing, then reannouncing and then renouncing again and, when itfinally starts getting a bit obvious, celebrating the fact that there are millions of dollars to finaliseconstruction of an already budgeted project that has already been celebrated leads to a delicatemedical condition called EVC—extreme voter cynicism. This practice is like telling one of our kids thatyou are going to buy them a DVD for their birthday and then giving them a brochure on it on their 10thbirthday, the packaging for it on their 11th birthday, the case for it on their 12th birthday and the actualDVD on their 13th birthday and then claiming to be a good father for giving them four birthday presentsin a row.

I must give credit where credit is due. Around $20 million has been allocated to widen andrehabilitate the Maryborough-Hervey Bay Road. Planning will also commence for the final threeadditional innovative support and housing trials to be developed in Maryborough, Loganlea and Ipswichby 2008-09. These houses will provide purpose-built accommodation for people with a disability whohave high and complex support needs. Many people have sought support in that area through my office.

The Maryborough regional office of the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service will be replaced aspart of a $7.2 million package, which is planned for building and minor works. Maryborough has alsoreceived around $1 million for its new neighbourhood centre. I had the pleasure of participating in thesod turning for that centre with Minister Warren Pitt. There is an allocation of $1.81 million to the FraserCoast Health Service District for various items of medical equipment, including a CT scanner for whichwe have been asking and negotiating with the Health Minister for some time. I look forward to itsdelivery to Maryborough. Also, $595,000 has been allotted to manage demand for services in the FraserCoast Health Service District.

Maryborough West State School, which was the school at which a lot of my children did theirschooling, will happily receive an upgrade to its special education facilities to the tune of $300,000. Newrelocatable forensic laboratories delivered to Maryborough and Nerang under the NATA implementationproject are now operational and satisfy international standards for laboratory accreditation. Thiscomplements the wonderful tactical crime squad, which I fought very hard for and which now happilyhas its headquarters in Maryborough and is serving our police district. Plus there will be more bedscommissioned at Maryborough Correctional Centre.

Maryborough City Council will receive $359,840 to construct multipurpose facilities; a $20,000grant to develop a sport and recreational plan for Maryborough; $30,000 to develop a regional sport andrecreation plan for the whole Fraser Coast; and $74,500 to construct a walkway and cycleway linkingPioneer Country Park to playing fields in Maryborough. Also, for our northern cousins, $9,000 isallocated to develop a master plan for the Torbanlea Sports Reserve; $30,112 to construct a skate parkat Howard, which my son Jarred will lobby me to take him to; and $1,250 to provide education andtraining workshops for sport and recreational organisations in Tiaro. The Burgowan Men’s Bowls Clubwill receive $69,829 to install a retractable shade structure for one bowling green at Torbanlea. Also, the


Maryborough District Cricket Association will receive $43,041 to construct toilets for access by disabledpeople, to install field lighting and to install irrigation for cricket at Maryborough.

The Maryborough Skindivers Inc. will receive $57,107 to construct a multiuse training and storagefacility to support scuba diving at Maryborough. The Maryborough Softball Association will receive$27,195 to upgrade three softball diamonds and a dugout and granite track runs. My electorate officer,who is a referee, is very pleased about that. The Maryborough Swimming Club Inc. will receive $75,000to construct an all-weather enclosure over a 25-metre swimming pool so that people will not freezewhen they go for a swim and so that they will not get wet—figure that out! That is a pool I use a lotpersonally, so I am very glad to see that.

The Aztecs Softball Club will receive $4,000 to establish a men’s softball competition. TheBrothers Maryborough Rugby League Football Club, a great institution, will receive $4,000 to establishstronger links with schools and clubs in the area. The Burrum District Community Centre Association willreceive $4,000 to provide coaching and instruction classes at Howard. The Burrum Heads Bowls Clubwill receive $4,000 to develop a five-year development plan. The Fraser Coast Junior Rugby League willreceive $4,000 for accredited Rugby League coaches and referees for training. The Hervey Bay ArchersInc. will receive $4,000 to conduct a come-and-try day for archery at Nikenbah. The Hilltop Squash Clubwill receive $3,480 to establish a new squash competition for youth in Maryborough.

The Last Frontier Shooting Club—this is a fantastic place—will receive $2,200 to conduct anopen day for shooting in Gunalda. That is where they dress up like cowboys and have a whale of a time.The Maryborough Active Riders Club will receive $2,798 to provide opportunities for club memberaccess to first aid training. The Maryborough Australian Rules Football Club will receive $4,000 toprovide combined sports medicine and level 1 courses. The Maryborough Brothers Junior RugbyLeague Football Club will receive $4,000 to establish school-club links.

The Maryborough District Cricket Association will receive $2,750 to develop club developmentplans for cricket and soccer. The Maryborough Pony Club will receive $4,000 to increase the number ofqualified instructors and provide first aid courses. The Maryborough Rugby League Referees willreceive $4,000 to provide opportunity for referees to gain accreditation.The Maryborough Skindivers willreceive $4,000 to update qualifications.

Mr Finn interjected.Mr CHRIS FOLEY: I take that interjection from the member for Yeerongpilly. Members should

remember that these are $4,000 amounts, not $400,000 amounts. The Maryborough Swimming Clubwill receive $3,625 to attend an eight-day Australian swimming coaches convention. The Tinana SoccerClub will receive $3,940 to develop and implement a five-year development plan.

This funding is very welcome, as I have already said before. We also need further funding for thepromenade project, which is the Mary River boardwalk. Urban Renewal, otherwise known as theReddacliff plan, has provided some fantastic benefits to our city and will become a centrepiece and thejewel in the crown of our city. The Fraser Coast marine industry precinct development is vital to thefuture of our city and has a 200-hectare freehold site approximately five kilometres downstream ofMaryborough on the Mary River. This site will include a designated marine industry park, incorporatingboat and ship building, marine equipment manufacture, marine repairs and maintenance provision aswell as a potential marine industry training facility. It has the potential to employ 400 to 2,500 people. Soit is quite critical to the future of employment prospects for our city.

I would also like to see some funding for a regional sporting complex jointly with the Hervey Bayelectorate, including motor sports, shooting et cetera. We also need the normal amounts of money andmore to be spent on roads, health, education and police services. One of the critical issues in myelectorate—and it is on my way to where I live—is an overpass for those going to TAFE. We have afantastic TAFE which is a little out of town and the kids have to go through a major roundabout over theBruce Highway to get there. For a place like Maryborough that has relatively high youth unemploymentwe need more youth initiatives to stimulate jobs to keep kids in our area. There is a perception that theyhave to leave and go to ‘Bris Vegas’ to get anywhere.

Our hospital needs increased funding and we are hoping to establish a centre of learning foryoung doctors in the first and second years of their training. I would also like to see the governmentdonate land for an administrative detention centre, which is something we have called for for quite sometime. Pinkenba certainly does not want one, but Maryborough does. I would also like to see some landbecome available for a detox and rehab centre, which is so badly needed in our electorate. I would alsolike to see some research funding—seed funding for alternative crops to sugar in our area.

Maryborough has been very active in inner-city rejuvenation. We have so many beautiful historicbuildings. As the Reddacliff plan comes on line and the focus is on the river and our city, we are hopingto turn Maryborough into a real cafe style city, a little like Montville and places like that. We needintensive upskilling and training in Maryborough. I thank the minister for coming to Maryboroughrecently to the opening of our new TAFE and the automotive area and engineering workshops that wererecently launched. We do need more support for people who suffer from dyslexia and also literacy andnumeracy issues.


Maryborough and council have jointly developed the state development centre project, in themarine industry precinct that I spoke about earlier, to a point where it is now ready and being sold to themarine industry. The Hervey Bay City Council is also a strong supporter of that project, because itcomplements its own planning for the consolidation and growth of the industry on the Fraser Coast.

The big issue for Maryborough is our hospital. Around 5,000 people rallied last week—I thought itwas more like 4,500, but I will not split hairs over it. Our hospital desperately needs a fully functioningaccident and emergency unit. Senior doctors located in Brisbane could perhaps be rotated toMaryborough on a three-monthly basis. There has been a lot of talk about doctors who have beenoffered free accommodation to live at Hervey Bay, as opposed to having to pay for their ownaccommodation if they live in Maryborough even though they are working in the same district. I haveasked the health minister to investigate those scandalous claims.

Given the expanding population is centred around both Maryborough and Hervey Bay—I in noway want to denigrate Hervey Bay or Maryborough hospitals or the great work they do—the simple factis that Hervey Bay needs a fully functioning accident and emergency unit and so does Maryborough.Hervey Bay serves a population of around 50,000 and Maryborough serves a population, includingsurrounding areas, of around 40,000. But most people who have read a map would know that they haveto come through Maryborough to get to Hervey Bay. We are very concerned about that extra half anhour of travel which could cause a loss of life, and it already has. In addition, hundreds of Hervey Baypeople daily come to Maryborough to work in its highly industrialised work force and Maryboroughcontinually caters for trauma cases from the Bruce Highway. Given that the current role of communityhealth councils has now been reduced to giving strategic advice, I also ask the health minister toinvestigate that.

Queensland Health immediately needs to increase its pay levels for doctors to achieve parity orbetter with other states. If Queensland Health has a morale crisis and doctors are paid low, then whywould anyone want to come and work in Queensland? But at least one of these problems could be fixedby the budget surplus. The Queensland government also needs to immediately begin restructuringQueensland Health—and I hope that some of the recommendations by Tony Morris will recognise that—and start to pull down the scandalous levels of bureaucracy that are consuming Queensland Healthdollars in administrative salaries instead of paying higher salaries to medical staff.

I want to close by quoting a reply that I received from the Minister for Emergency Services whichhas confirmed that Maryborough had 43.58 per cent of the code 1 calls for our region during the 2003-04 year even though Hervey Bay has roughly double the population of Maryborough. So we had almostas many code 1 calls even though we have half the population. That equates to a code 1 call needed forevery 13.81 persons in Maryborough compared with Hervey Bay only needing a code 1 call for every21.72 persons. As we have a touch under double the need for emergency services of an acute nature, Iask the minister to advise what plans are in place to use the budget surplus to ramp up Maryborough Aand E to full strength. I will conclude my contribution by saying what I opened with: we are glad for anynew money but we certainly do not like rehashed dinner put up as a new meal.

Mr HOPPER (Darling Downs—NPA) (12.40 pm): I rise to speak to the state budget for the 2005-06 financial year to give an overview of what this budget really means for the Darling Downs electorate.While there have been some positives for the electorate, I am also justifiably concerned about thecurrent government’s failure to recognise and commit to many critically required projects to sustain andsecure the electorate’s long-term viability. Prior to delving into the nuts and bolts of this budget, I believeit is appropriate and timely to give recognition to the federal government for its funding boost of nearly$1 billion or maybe even a bit more. This funding has been handed down to this government by way ofthe GST and special purpose payments from Canberra. It is a bit like the Treasurer and the Premierwining the lottery. It is as simple as that. They have won the lottery in Queensland. The member forBurnett was telling me about that this morning. I think it is a very good saying: they have won the lottery.Here we see them gloating and walking around with their chests out, and it is thanks to John Howard inCanberra. I would also like to point out that, without the federal government’s input, the Queenslandgovernment’s budget would maybe just break even.

I would now like to take this opportunity to thank the Treasurer and the Queensland governmentfor the injection of funds which have been allocated as part of the 2005-06 budget in the electorate ofDarling Downs. I will start with the good news and then I will finish with the disappointing side of thisyear’s budget. I have outlined the budget allocations within each department which gives a conciseoverview of this expenditure. Let us start with Health. We have had a $4.4 million upgrade to facilities atthe outpatients maternity and emergency departments of the Dalby Hospital. I know what has beengoing on in Health in recent times. We have all seen what has occurred. I wrote to the health ministerlast year describing what was happening and I asked him for a deputation. I came and visited the healthminister and he sat down and spoke with me at length about the Dalby Hospital. He said to me, ‘Thebest thing I could do is come out and have a look,’ and that is exactly what the minister did. I appreciatethat the minister had a hands-on look. From that hands-on look, we now have $4.4 million put in torenew those facilities at the outpatients maternity and emergency departments. Colleen Rasmussen isthe DON at Dalby, as she was at Gympie. She is an extremely talented and gifted woman. She has


terrific staff morale, and she has great ambition and thoughts as to what should be good for thathospital. So I would like to thank the health minister for coming forward with that money.

There is a combined total of $3.07 million to be distributed between the Toowoomba, northerndowns, southern downs and west Moreton health service districts to buy medical equipment in the 2005-06 budget period. The Dalby residential aged care facility has received an additional $11.52 million toprogress the construction of the 80-bed nursing home facility on the existing hospital nursing home siteat Dalby. Dalby South State School has received a budget allocation for an administration upgrade, with$320,000 to be expended this year and an additional anticipated carryover amount of $267,000. DalbyState School is to receive $478,000 in this year’s budget, with an anticipated additionalcarryover amount of $319,000 to be expended for an administration upgrade. Dalby State School hasreceived an allocation for a major upgrade of the outdoor learning environment for the amount of$405,000. There has been $2.2 million allocated towards the widening of existing pavement of theToowoomba-Dalby roadway. There is $5.2 million to upgrade the Surat Basin railway track betweenDalby and Rosewood, with a total project cost of $15.9 million.

The Oakey Police Station has been allocated $495,000. I know that through my representation tothe previous minister we put this in place. A lot of work has gone into that, and I thank the governmentfor finally replacing that police station. It is a complete replacement of the existing police station. Therehas been $444.6 million to continue building the $1.2 billion Kogan Creek power station by CS Energy.This power station is located just outside my electorate. However, I believe Dalby will benefit greatlyfrom its close proximity. Most people when they move to the country like to live on the eastern sideclosest to the coast. I know Chinchilla at this very moment has gone mad with the real estate boom, andDalby will prosper as well from the power station and the fruits that this will bring.

Some $19.5 million on a major new substation and powerline works and $34 million on variouscapital works in the broader south-west Queensland and Darling Downs area will improve the ErgonEnergy distribution network. There has been $4.2 million to purchase and develop industrial land westof Toowoomba at Charlton and Wellcamp. We all know what is going to happen there with the industrialestate, the rail link and hopefully the second range crossing which is to be put in place very soon.

I will now elaborate on the most disappointing side of this budget from my electorate’sperspective. Once again, I have categorised each area within the respective departments. There hasbeen a failure to deliver incentives to encourage doctors, nurses and dentists to our rural and regionalareas. This is a major problem for our rural and regional areas. I know only too well the lengths that theDalby Hospital had gone to in trying to attract dentists to operate at Dalby Hospital, and I do believethere is one starting later this year. This position had been advertised throughout Australia over anumber of years without success, and finally it was advertised overseas. However, this problem is notrestricted to dentists; it is part of the entire medical profession, and the government must deliverincentives to change this attitude for the wellbeing of our rural and regional communities.

There has been a failure to increase the Patient Travel Subsidy Scheme. This is a scheme whichwill be heavily utilised as a result of the continuous removal and downgrade of our existing rural andregional health services. There has been a failure to remove all asbestos from our schools, and weknow what the member for Moggill has been on about recently. I believe he has a very valid point. Therehas been a failure to provide airconditioning for all of our state schools. I have made representations tothe minister for education on numerous occasions on behalf of many P&C associations that haveconsistently sought my assistance in obtaining airconditioning for their respective schools. I know that atthe Dalby State High School the windows on the western side have to be open as far as possible in thesummer when it gets up near 40 degrees. When all the trucks on the Warrego Highway pull up at thetraffic lights and take off, the students cannot hear the teachers trying to teach. That is one facility thatmust be airconditioned. We must aircondition the western side of the Dalby State High School at least.

Unfortunately for all the schools located within my electorate, these requests are denied due tothe fact that they are located outside the Cooler Schools zones. Perhaps the minister is not aware thatoutside her airconditioned office these students, teachers and support staff are working in classroomswhich have regularly recorded temperatures of around 40 degrees. Even though we are not in theofficial Cooler Schools zone, unfortunately for my electorate mother nature does not recognise theCooler Schools zone, unlike this Queensland government.

There has been a failure to deliver funding for the highway upgrade for the Toowoomba rangeand the rail upgrade, both of which I believe are clearly on the current government’s never-never list. Welook at the coal that Acland coalmine is pumping out now, and it is going to get bigger and bigger. Thereis a massive coal seam there that we have to try to tap into with our world high prices for coal. It wouldbe great to have the facilities to get it to port. The big-ticket item for Toowoomba in the South EastQueensland Infrastructure Plan was $680 million for the second range crossing, but the stategovernment is not prepared to commit a cent of its own money to this project, with the expectation thatthe federal government will fully fund this major project. Think of the help this will bring Queensland. Weare a Queensland government.


There has been a failure to deliver specific funding for the upgrade of the Bunya Highway north ofBell in this year’s budget. A lot of trucks use that road heavily. As with many roads in my electorate, thestate’s road system is falling apart. Previously some money was allocated as part of the 2004-05financial year budget. However, there is still a desperate need to continue this funding upgrade. I amalso only too well aware of the need for a number of repairs and upgrades that are urgently required onnumerous local roads within my electorate.

There has been a failure to allocate two police liaison officers in Dalby. I have met with previouspolice ministers, and I have talked with this police minister. We desperately need two PLOs. The numberof people who need that assistance is immense. I have spoken about the need for the appointment ofthese PLOs for a number of years. I have met with representatives from the police and the Indigenouscommunity. Both parties are in agreement that this would be most advantageous for the Dalbycommunity.

This government has failed to abort its intention to reap a record level of profits from the energysector during the 2005-06 budget period in spite of the crippling energy crisis that Queensland iscurrently facing. Ergon has been struggling over a number of years with antiquated infrastructure andunderstaffing. I believe that it would be in the best interests of all consumers for the government to putall profits back into upgrading the state’s electricity network.

There was a failure in the budget to deliver funding for a desperately needed recycled waterpipeline from Brisbane to the Lockyer and Darling Downs. The budget’s omission of funding for thisparticular project is the most disappointing aspect of the entire budget, especially when it is consideredthat over half of Queensland is crippled by this drought, and here we have the perfect solution to theproblem. It will not only be a boost to regional production but also it will bring environmental advantagesto Moreton Bay. This can only be good news for everyone.

I met with a farmer only yesterday. The farmers can pay for it from Toowoomba to Cecil Plains.They will put enough money in to cover those costs. What we have to do is get that pipeline up to the topof the range. It has to be a Lockyer-Darling Downs project. We cannot talk about it as being a Lockyerproject. That waste water must go up that range. We know what is happening. We have heard of thelosses Queensland has had because of this drought. That area is one of the richest pieces ofagricultural country in the world, and it is drying up. This pipeline could only be good for everyone.However, in its wisdom the Queensland government has once again ignored all the advice and failedthe people in the Lockyer and Darling Downs regions. In all honesty, the Smart State governmentappears to go out of its way to prove it is anything but smart.

I looked at every portfolio. As far as I could see every portfolio had an increase, and then wecame to the DPI. One of the biggest disappointments of this budget is the failure to increase theDepartment of Primary Industries and Fisheries’ budget, which has been subsequently slashed by$23 million. We have a minister who sits in cabinet. He is supposed to argue for his portfolio, but he isgiving money away. We have this portfolio slashed beyond means. It sickens me to the core that thisgovernment takes its eyes off our rural producers and primary industries to the extent that it does.Mr Palaszczuk is everyone’s friends, but when it comes to fighting for farmers he does everything butfight for them.

There is a failure to assist the cattle producers to cover the costs of the electronic tags requiredwhen the NLIS starts on 1 July, which is two or three weeks away. That is going to be a major change forour beef industry. Some producers sell thousands upon thousands of cattle. It is a major educationalprogram. This government has not put a cent towards it, and that really annoys me.

There is a failure to deliver the new drought assistance measures, despite more than half of thestate being in the grip of drought. There is also a failure to itemise or declare what has been spent onthe drought to date. There is a failure to provide a sufficient number of stock inspectors for regionalareas. We have seen how the DPI has been taken out of our smaller towns. We have seen over 300staff leave that department over the last few years. That disgusts me. The government has, in fact,decreased these numbers in recent times instead of taking the initiative to increase the numbers as theyare required to by the industry.

In summary, whilst I am appreciative of the funding allocations that the Darling Downs electoratehas received, I am also desperately disappointed in respect to the failure of the current government toadequately deliver some of the most critical requirements of the electorate, especially the waste waterpipeline and the terrible loss of $23 million out of the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries.

Mr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (12.53 pm): The people of the Stafford electorate are bigwinners out of this budget. Before I detail some of the specifics of the funding initiatives in the electorate,I want to put to rest some of the persistent propaganda and untruths being spread by some membersopposite. The lie that the states are awash with GST funds and, therefore, we should be able to fundanything that anyone wants is just plain wrong. As you would know, Mr Deputy Speaker, because youmade reference to this in your speech—and I thank you for providing that research to me—theProductivity Commission says that the GST income for all states is $33.1 billion. Income from companyand income tax to the federal government is $131.3 billion. The federal government has $100 billionextra in its tax regime than all the states’ GST money.


In terms of percentages, today the Treasurer has made available to members a table to show thegrowth of taxes. Income tax from companies for the federal coffers is up 77 per cent. The income taxfrom individuals is up 29 per cent. The total income tax to the federal coffers is 41 per cent. The totalincrease for the GST to the states is only 22 per cent. Treasurer Costello and Prime Minister Howardcontinue to tell the lie but that does not make it true. In absolute figures, the Commonwealth governmentis raking in $100 billion more than the states’ GST. In percentage figures, it is getting a total of 41 percent growth compared to 22 per cent growth for the states.

It is disgraceful that the federal coalition government is neglectful in its duty by withdrawing fromexisting programs and by underfunding across-the-board. It fails to provide funding for roads. Membersopposite, particularly from the National Party, are claiming that the road network needs to be upgraded.It sure does. Previous federal governments used their funding regime and their income regime to dothat. The current federal National Party leader has failed in his duty to use his $100 billion excess tofund that.

Mr Wallace interjected. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: I take the interjection from the member for Thuringowa; the leader of the

federal National Party is weak. He is not standing up for the National Party as Black Jack McEwan andothers before, including Doug Anthony, would have done.

The federal government has failed in the areas of disability, public housing, health—both on theMedicare and pharmaceutical side—regional development and social security. But the Beattie stateLabor government has, in fact, served the people of Queensland well and has certainly served thepeople of Stafford.

In going to the election we promised two main things—a new Stafford Police Station and ageneral hospital at the Prince Charles Hospital site. This budget delivers $4.58 million to complete thenew Stafford Police Station, which has a total project cost of $5.2 million. I want to pay special tribute toSenior Sergeant Tony Graham and his crew based at Stafford in the old cop shop at the corner ofWebster and Stafford roads. They are working under some poor conditions at the moment. They havehad great input into the new police station. The groundwork of the new police station started just lastweek.

In fact, the whole of the north side of Brisbane will benefit from the $50.8 million to continue theupgrade of the Prince Charles Hospital to establish a full-scale emergency department and provide anadditional 120 beds, operating theatres and renal dialysis facilities with a total project cost of$84.5 million. I want to thank the District Manager, Gloria Wallace; Jon Roberts, Executive Director ofCorporate Services; Cheryl Burns, Director of Nursing; Michael Cleary, Executive Director of MedicalServices; and all the other executives at the Prince Charles Hospital for the fantastic planing that hasgone into that $84.5 million project, which will provide a general hospital for the people of the north sideof Brisbane. The Prince Charles Hospital Health Service District is also getting $2.78 million for extramedical equipment.

$1.25 million is going to go to community organisations under the Home and Community Careprogram which provides support and maintenance services for eligible people at home to prevent earlyadmission to residential care. In particular, I want to thank Kevin Rouse, secretary/manager of BurnieBrae Senior Citizens Centre, Judy Schubert and the president, Al Fielding, who has been a long-timepresident of the Chermside and District Senior Citizens Centre. They work with a number of governmentagencies and other community groups to provide services to the elderly.

I am also pleased that there is a massive input of $7.5 million for new public housing, including 44medium-density units and a detached house out of a total project cost of $10.38 million. There will be asignificant amount—$700,000—for the renewal of 19 public rental houses at Chermside with a totalproject cost of $5 million.

The schools in my electorate are also winners as a result of this budget: Wavell Heights StateSchool, with $270,000 to complete additional amenities; $53,000 for Stafford State School and WavellState High School under the Triple R program; $54,000 for some high maintenance priority work atKedron State School, Somerset Hills State School and Kedron State High School; and, importantly,$32,000 for outside school hours care at Holy Cross School at Wooloowin, St Anthony’s at Kedron,Queen of Apostles at Stafford, Somerset Hills State School, Stafford State School and Wavell HeightsState School. That is catering for the families in my area, which has one of the highest percentages ofsingle parents, and I thank the government for that.

Also, significantly, $810,000 is allocated to provide accommodation and support for women andchildren escaping domestic and family violence and to provide counselling and support for families atrisk of homelessness. This is part of the state government’s total contribution of $2.43 million.

There are many other groups, individuals and families who will benefit from the budget that isbefore us. Because of the hour, I will stop there. However, through a press release I have detailed someof the individual allocations that those community groups have received. I thank the Treasurer, who hasbrought down a true Labor budget. There is support for those in greatest need. A measure of any


civilised society is not how you treat the wealthiest and the most capable; it is how you treat those whoare the least capable and those in most need. This budget addresses that. Those opposite, with theiruniversities, their hospitals and their housing, say, ‘If you have got the money, good luck to you. Getmore and we will give you the biggest tax cuts and those who are without, tough luck’. That is not Laborprinciples; that is not Labor policy. This is a true Labor budget and I give it my full support.

Debate, on motion of Mr T Sullivan, adjourned.Sitting suspended from 1.00 pm to 2.30 pm.


Second ReadingResumed from p. 2085. Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (2.30 pm): I rise to

support the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2005. I simply say that if it were not forthe actions of the member for Burnett, we would probably not be here today debating this bill. We haveto refresh our memories for a moment and consider the vilification of the member for Burnett when heraised this issue in parliament some three months ago. He raised this issue in parliament because of thevilification, the intimidation and the ignoring of courageous nurses like Toni Hoffman who had beentrying to raise this issue for some two years. Letters had been referred to the minister going back toOctober last year and also the minister’s predecessor back in 2003, but those letters fell on deaf ears.

This government needs to be reminded that it did not even want an inquiry when this issue wasfirst raised. When Dr Patel jumped on the plane—paid for by this government, we now know—and left togo back overseas, the minister said that an inquiry was unnecessary. He said, ‘What would it achieve?What would it flesh out?’ The Premier himself said that maybe the CMC would be the appropriateorganisation to hold such an inquiry. That would have been great: behind the scenes, behind closeddoors and we would never have known. It was the tenacity of the Nationals that forced this governmentto set up a royal commission which is now bringing matters to a conclusion, matters which QueenslandHealth, this government, the Queensland Police Service and other authorities probably had thecapability to bring to a conclusion much earlier.

We strongly support endeavours to make sure that the victims of Dr Patel and their families canhave some sort of effective closure, justice and redress. However, in lending support to the bill I wish toplace on the public record that the opposition will not be party to a facade-building exercise, for whichthe Beattie government is renowned—a facade-building exercise in which the members opposite set outto make themselves the victims.

I have not been very happy with the way that this matter has operated to date. This morning wereceived these recommendations from Commissioner Morris. We know that the recommendations havebeen devised only in the last couple of days, but if the government is going to require full bipartisansupport we need to be involved much earlier. The opposition needs to be able to scrutinise thesematters. There was not a lot of bipartisanship when the member for Burnett raised this issue inparliament some three months ago; however, there was a lot of vilification and intimidation. Now wehave the call for bipartisanship from the government when the blowtorch is very near the belly.

This morning before this bill was brought into parliament—and there was a pretabling at 9o’clock—the opposition tried to obtain a copy of it. We were told that we were not able to get a copy of ituntil parliament resumed at 9.30 this morning. We were being rung before 9 o’clock by the media andactually told what was in it by members of the media who had actually been given a copy of it. We weretrying to get a copy of it at the same time but, no, we were told that we would have to wait untilparliament resumed at 9.30 this morning. It was only after some very, very serious remonstrations,wherein we asked why copies had been handed to the media and others when the official oppositioncould not get a copy of it, that we actually managed to obtain a copy of it.

The opposition will support every endeavour to provide the victims of Dr Jayant Patel with qualitymedical and surgical care and, for that matter, the opposition will support every endeavour that providesQueenslanders with a public health system that delivers quality and safe medical and surgicalprocedures when and if those procedures are needed.

I note that the objective of the bill is to implement recommendations A to D of the interim report ofthe Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry. I commend the Bundaberg Hospital Commission ofInquiry and, in particular, the chairman, Mr Tony Morris QC, for their diligent work and commitment tobring these preliminary urgent recommendations to the attention of the parliament.

The Governor in Council appointed Mr Morris to conduct an inquiry into the various mattersconnected with the Bundaberg Base Hospital, Dr Jayant Patel and other health department issues. Itmust be remembered that the Premier was dragged kicking and screaming into the position of having toestablish a commission of inquiry in the first instance. As I have already mentioned, and I will mention


again, the Premier desperately wanted the Crime and Misconduct Commission to do a quick inquiry intothe horrendous activities of Dr Patel which were revealed in this parliament by the member for Burnett,Rob Messenger. I have mentioned that previously. Even under constant pressure from the opposition,Bundaberg patients and the media, the Premier kept delivering his line that the CMC was the right bodyto investigate. Fortunately for the victims of Dr Patel, the CMC adopted a contrary position. The CMCsaid that it was not equipped to investigate the matter. I say very well done to the CMC.

Nevertheless, we now see the Premier deluding himself again and again that he was the one whoset up the inquiry. But we remember the accurate historical sequence of events. Today I speak on behalfof all Queenslanders who have every right to be outraged by the revelations unfolding about this state’sdamaged public health system—a damaged and disintegrating public health system that occurred onthe Beattie Labor government’s watch and which the government constantly ignored despite repeatedcries from the public, the medical and nursing professions and, of course, the opposition.

What did the Premier do? What did the Labor health minister do? They hid behind their much-worn but ever-present public relations spin. There was so much spin that everyone was giddy from it;there was a profusion of propaganda messages that were going out to the electorate and the communityat large. In fact, it had such a greedy desire for more spin that the government arrogantly published thesupercilious health report written by the Premier’s senior media adviser only a couple of years ago.

The amendments contained in the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2005 willendeavour to take care of some of the flawed administrative arrangements that have been identified todate. Whilst I lend mine and the opposition’s support to these amendments as stated, I must point outthat the existing provisions should have picked up Dr Patel in the first place. If the existing provisions,properly overseen and administered by the authorities and checked by this government, had beenfollowed through Dr Patel would have been picked up much earlier. It is a fallacy to say that there wasno legislative provision to identify the inadequacies of Dr Patel’s qualifications or credentials. It was nota legislative problem or a legislative deficiency. It was purely and simply an administrative problem:firstly, with the checking of documentation and, secondly, with the lackadaisical approach toadministrative procedure. Mediocrity is the benchmark of this government and its agencies and thecasual processing of Dr Patel’s application is a classic example of that mediocrity.

Then there is the incredible appointment by the Department of Health of an approved seniormedical officer to the position of director of surgery. The Department of Health in Bundaberg andBrisbane knew that Dr Jayant Patel was approved by the Medical Board as a senior medical officer toan area of need only. That is what he was appointed as. The Department of Health knew that Dr JayantPatel had not been clinically assessed to be anything other than a senior medical officer who wouldperform under supervision.

When the Department of Health promoted Dr Patel to the exalted position of director of surgery itthen put a clinically unassessed doctor in charge, thus removing any opportunity for supervision andultimately any opportunity to question his competence. With the culture of bullying and intimidationwhich is rife through the Department of Health, how could any subordinates question the exalted one?

These amendments will not eliminate mediocre standards within the Department of Health or thelack of appropriate watch from the government opposite. Nor will the amendments eliminate managerswho will not manage or be accountable to the policies, directives or legislative structures in existence inthe Department of Health. Nor will the amendments overcome the inadequacies of the Minister forHealth, who has time and time again shown his lack of knowledge of what is going on in the department.As Minister for Health he is commissioned to administer this rather large portfolio. He swore an oath toadminister the Department of Health and yet time and time again he conducts his ministerial duties froma distance. In fact, the Bette Midler song From a Distance could be used to describe the minister andcould be his theme song.

What does the Premier intend to do about this Minister for Health? Similarly, what does thegovernment intend to do about its managers who do not or cannot manage the job they have beenappointed to do? For example, on 19 May 2003, some two years ago, Toni Hoffman and Dr John Joinerwent to see Dr Darren Keating, the director of medical services at Bundaberg Base Hospital, to tell themabout a patient who had an oesophagectomy. I believe this patient is the one to whom Mr Morrisreferred. I speak of course of James Edward Phillips.

As the director of medical services Dr Keating must have known that Bundaberg Hospital was illequipped to be undertaking such complex surgery. When it all went wrong and he had complaints fromthe ICU nurse manager and Dr John Joiner, why did Dr Darren Keating not act immediately to stop suchbutchering? However, I suppose Dr Keating could have thought similarly to the Premier—that Dr Patelwas suffering from the Jesus complex. Does the Premier still think along the lines he enunciated theother day on television and elsewhere with regard to Dr Patel?

In the health department’s submission there were pages and pages of policies and directivesoutlining the department’s adherence to strict quality guidelines and a strict clinical auditing process.The reality is that there is a framework, but that is all. No-one seems to check that the framework has apurpose, that the directives under the framework are being adhered to or that recommendations madeby a clinical audit process have been implemented in any way.


A document came into my possession recently. It is a copy of the department’s operating theatrereview. Recommendation 10 of that review states—Surgical throughput and complexity be monitored on a monthly basis at district and corporate levels, with reporting of variations inthroughput.

That is quite clear. It goes on to state—Action: District accountable officers monitor surgical throughput and complexity on a monthly basis, reporting to operating theatremanagement committee and district executive. Action: District executive report reasons for unexpected reduction in surgical throughput and complexity to zonal managementunits.

These are things it says need to be done. It goes on to state further—Action: Surgical Access Service to continue monitoring and reporting surgical throughput and complexity to Queensland HealthExecutive and zonal management units on a monthly basis.

So what went wrong with the monthly reporting mechanisms at the district, zonal and corporateoffice levels? As I stated before, these amendments, while supported, will not overcome the inadequacyof management in the government’s health department from the top down—and that includes theministerial level.

The amendments in this bill relate to administrative changes. However, Mr Morris’s interim reportrecommends actions to be taken by the Queensland Police Service in relation to alleged breaches ofthe Criminal Code sections 502, 408C, 328, 282, 288, 296, 302(1) (b) and 274. My question in thisregard is very simple: what is wrong with the Attorney-General, the Director of Public Prosecutions andthe Commissioner for Police, with the vast array of legal expertise within their respective departments,that they did not or could not identify the breaches of the Criminal Code and Dr Patel could have beenpursued sooner rather than later? We have seen what has happened in that regard.

There has been an appalling lack of administrative oversight from those within the Department ofHealth and a blase, ignorant and cavalier attitude from the Labor government in Queensland, from theminister down. It should have known something was going wrong and should have been able to hear thecries that were very much emanating from those people who worked in the Bundaberg Base Hospitaland also the patients in that particular area.

What is different in this report, particularly with regard to criminal prosecutions, from what wasknown when this particular inquiry was set up three months go? What is different in this report today withregard to prosecutions from what was known when Toni Hoffman wrote to Peter Leck in October lastyear referring to certain matters and probably referring to this particular case which is now being actedon as a murder charge? The evidence was there. It was clear; it was plain. It was an absolute derelictionof duty and a lack of proper oversight and commitment to justice which has seen it fail and get to thisparticular stage.

There is one final point that I will touch on before concluding. There appears to be nothing in thislegislation, and there seems to have been no mention whatsoever this morning from the Premier oranyone else, of addressing the issue of promotion without assessment, which is what caused theproblem in the first place. That is what a lot of the problem was. The Medical Board did do part of its jobbecause it appointed him to a medical officer. He was then appointed to a position at the local levelabove his capacity in Queensland Health.

Mr Horan: The department promoted him. Mr SPRINGBORG: It was the Department of Health, as the member for Toowoomba South said.

The Department of Health promoted him to that position. It has been termed ‘deeming’. I prefer to call itpromotion without proper assessment and proper understanding of the qualifications of that particularposition. It is still going on with consultant physicians in such places as Mount Isa. What is thegovernment doing to address that issue which, by and large, caused this problem in the first place?Absolutely nothing. That is what is happening. We are having people appointed with certain riders ontheir appointment and then Queensland Health upgrades them and appoints them to do surgery andprocedures which are over and above their capacity and qualifications to do.

It was the system that failed. If the existing system had been properly overseen then we would nothave had the carnage at the Bundaberg Base Hospital. By and large we support these amendments.There should have been more notice given to us, quite frankly. We would urge more notice in the future.This is certainly not going to be the last tranche of amendments. But amendments will not meananything unless the resources and the internal commitment and external commitment are given to makesure that they are properly implemented and overseen.

Hon. GR NUTTALL (Sandgate—ALP) (Minister for Health) (2.48 pm): I rise today to support theMedical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2005. The bill amends a number of existing provisions in the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001 and creates a number of new offenceswith significant penalties for a person seeking registration as a medical practitioner in Queensland whodoes not tell the truth. The amendments included in this bill follow from recommendations made to thegovernment by the Morris royal commission received today. What happened at the Bundaberg Base


Hospital has disappointed and appalled all of us. The recommendations implemented in this bill are thefirst step to ensuring appropriate safeguards to make sure this never happens again.

The bill inserts a number of new sections into the Medical Practitioners Registration Act 2001.Under this bill, a number of offences are created for the first time, and these include an offence for anyperson who is not a doctor under the pretence of being registered to be a doctor; an offence for thegiving of false information or a false document to the Medical Board when seeking registration; andoffences for continuing to practise as a doctor after they have given false information or a falsedocument to the Medical Board or they failed to tell the Medical Board about false information or adocument when they have become aware that the information is false. All of these offences carrypenalties of fines of up to $150,000 or three years imprisonment.

There should be no question that this government is serious about addressing the concernsraised following what has occurred at the Bundaberg Base Hospital. These penalties are the toughest inthe country and highlight the seriousness of the registration process and our commitment to making thesystem work to protect patients. The bill also amends a number of provisions already included in the act.Section 161 of the act is amended to include that a person who is not a registrant must not allowthemselves to be held out as being eligible for registration. The penalty for this offence remains thesame, with a fine of up to $75,000. The other section of the act that is amended is section 273 with theaddition of a new subsection. This subsection creates the offence of giving false information or a falsedocument to the Medical Board. The penalty for this offence is a maximum of 200 penalty units or$15,000.

The bill also makes a number of minor amendments for the cancellation of a doctor’s registrationif they are found to have committed an offence under the act. The report handed to the government byMr Tony Morris and the assistant commissioners this morning clearly outlines the commission’s viewthat Dr Patel’s conduct in connection with his registration in Queensland as a medical practitioner wasfalse and fraudulent. It also identifies that the current legislative arrangements surrounding suchbehaviour are inadequate. Under the legislation as it stands, this activity attracts a maximum fine of only50 penalty units or $3,750. The commission is also quite clearly of the view that provisions of theregistration act which are designed to prevent and punish attempts to obtain registration fraudulently areinsufficiently comprehensive.

The four recommendations made by the royal commission and included in this bill are aimed atfixing the deficiencies in the legislation and ensuring we have the best system possible to registerdoctors. In this debate, it is also important that we acknowledge the views of the commission with regardto the Medical Board of Queensland and reforms already undertaken by that body. I have madestatements in this House before outlining the changes that the Medical Board of Queensland hasadopted. In light of the reasonable time constraints of this debate, I do not intend to go into those detailsagain. However, I would like to particularly note that the commission commends these initiatives and issatisfied that they have significantly reduced, if not eliminated, the risk of this happening again.

The recommendations received today and included in this bill cannot be construed as criticismsof these reforms but rather a strengthening of the legislative foundations on which the board operates.As a government we cannot say, and the commission has not indicated, whether or not these are theonly legislative reforms that will be necessary. This is a question for the commission to answer and tomake recommendations on to this government. At this stage, what I do wish to say is that thegovernment is supportive of the recommendations contained in this interim report and has acted asquickly as possible to ensure that they are implemented.

In the report that was received today, there are a number of comments raised by CommissionerMorris and his assistant commissioners in relation to the board and a number of comments that I wouldlike to comment on from the Leader of the Opposition in his address to the House this afternoon. Inparagraph 26 of the report, the commission says—The initiatives taken by the Board—

and he is referring to the Medical Board—are to be commended, and we are satisfied that they will very significantly reduce (if not eliminate) the risk of ‘another Patel’.Nonetheless, we believe that the legislative foundations on which the Board operates require to be substantially strengthened, notbecause we doubt the efficacy of the procedural improvements already adopted by the Board, but to provide further support forthose procedural improvements in the form of appropriately severe criminal sanctions in cases where false information ordocuments are supplied to the Board.It is not at all unlikely that the final report of the Commission of Inquiry will recommend more far-reaching changes to theRegistration Act.

Of course, he is referring to the Medical Practitioners Registration Act. It continues—It is a matter for the Government—and, ultimately, for the Parliament—whether the amendments which we are recommendingshould be adopted immediately—

and of course today we are doing that—or should await a more comprehensive revision of the Registration Act.


Quite clearly, the commissioner has indicated in his report that there probably will be morerecommendations around the Medical Practitioners Registration Act. As a government, we have showntoday that we are willing and quite keen to support the recommendations that have been brought downin this interim report. I as the minister am looking forward to the final report and the finalrecommendations that may be contained in that report, particularly in relation to the MedicalPractitioners Registration Act.

The honourable Leader of the Opposition in his address to the House this afternoon spoke of hisconcerns about other areas within the hospital system where doctors may be practising above theircompetencies. We have done two things in that regard. Firstly, we have met with the AMA—and I havesaid this in the House before—and we have asked the AMA to work with us and put together a panel ofassessors who will assess the skills of all overseas trained doctors who are currently in the system, andthat work is being done as we speak. Secondly, I have asked my department to speak with all medicalsuperintendents in all of our hospitals to assess and ensure that the doctors under their charge areacting appropriately and are also performing within the scope of their skills and their ability. We havedone that to ensure that an incident such as Dr Patel does not happen again. I have, as I said, asked mydepartment to do that to ensure that we have doctors who are performing within their scope of skills andability.

Last year the Premier and I opened the Skills Development Centre at the Royal BrisbaneHospital, and it is a facility which doctors who do need some support or upskilling or reskilling can attendand be guided by professionals in terms of their further development. We can all be proud that we havethat facility here in Queensland. All of us in this House are obviously mortified at what has happened atBundaberg. None of us ever wants to see that happen again. By the commission of inquiry going aboutits work—and we know that at the end of next week it is attending Bundaberg for several weeks forpublic hearings—we hope that at the end of the day we will be able to walk out of this knowing that wehave the best possible systems in place to both vet and check overseas doctors who may wish topractise in Queensland. But I have to say that we will continue to struggle as a nation to supply thedoctors that are needed. It is very difficult for us because of the shortage.

Mr COPELAND (Cunningham—NPA) (2.58 pm): At the outset, I put on the record mycongratulations to Tony Morris for the report that he has delivered. He has cut through and really seenthe systematic failure of Queensland Health at every turn. If people listened to the minister, they wouldbe of the belief that the systems were not in place to stop a Dr Patel from happening and the scandal atBundaberg from happening. But if people were doing their jobs, if people were following the policies thatwere in place and if people were actually following the directives that were in place, then this wouldnever have happened. This would never have happened!

It is the absolute failure of Queensland Health, the failure of this minister and the failure of thisgovernment that has allowed this situation to occur. What is more, 87 deaths did not make thisgovernment finally act. It knew about the matter. It had been reported. The complaint was made as farback as May 2003. That was two years ago. But what happened? Absolutely nothing! Then in October2004, when Toni Hoffman again put her complaints in writing, what happened? Absolutely nothing!

An opposition member: A cover-up.Mr COPELAND: There was nothing but a cover-up and intimidation of that person who

complained. It was not until March when this issue was raised by the opposition—by the member forBurnett and me—and following a week and a half of bullying and vilification that anything happened. Iwell remember the Premier saying that we did not need an inquiry or we did not need a royalcommission. It was only when the political heat started to get too much that the Premier performed abackflip and on the Tuesday of the parliamentary sitting announced that we would have a royalcommission.

On that day we asked him to hold an extraordinary cabinet meeting to set out the terms ofreference so that the inquiry could commence straightaway. But no, the matter was not urgent enough todo that. It was not until the following Monday that we received the terms of reference. Yet this morningwe have seen that an extraordinary cabinet meeting can be held. As soon as this report was received,the Premier was able to call a cabinet meeting. Back when the inquiry was announced, it was not urgentenough to call an extraordinary cabinet meeting. It was not urgent enough to call an extraordinarycabinet meeting when we knew that there were people dead and injured. The situation was allowed tocontinue.

I urge everyone in this parliament, everyone in the media and everyone in Queensland to readthis report of Tony Morris, because it shows the systemic failure of Queensland Health. He said that it isnothing short of scandalous that four years after the Medical Practitioners Registration Act came intooperation, Queensland Health is still using a policy document that was created nine years ago based on1939 legislation and that this situation has been permitted to continue despite the Dr Patel issue.

So even when concerns had been raised, the government still did not look into them. Thegovernment still did not realise that it was not complying with its own legislation. That is justextraordinary. If Queensland Health is not complying with the registration act, what other acts is it notcomplying with? What other things are not being done correctly?


We heard the minister say again that Queensland Health is struggling to find staff for theseregional hospitals. I refer to point 50.4 of Tony Morris’s report, which states—Queensland Health has, in the past, required no proof that a public sector employer has been unable to fill a vacancy, merelyassuming that the hospital has been unable to find a suitable applicant with the appropriate qualifications.

Queensland Health is not even checking that. It is just saying, ‘Obviously, we are not going to beable to find a suitably qualified person. So we will just get someone from overseas.’ Then QueenslandHealth appoints an overseas trained doctor as senior medical officer without undergoing anyassessment. Then it promotes them to a chief of surgery role.

This whole situation has been created by Queensland Health. At every turn, we see the failure ofQueensland Health. It is just extraordinary that the Premier and the minister have said, ‘We are going toput in place these recommendations and it will never happen again.’ It should not have happened in thefirst place. It has been allowed to happen and it is still happening. Even after all of the issues that havebeen raised, it is still going on. Thanks to Tony Morris, it is only now that we might have someprogress—no thanks to the minister, no thanks to the Premier and no thanks to the government. Thanksto Tony Morris, that progress can be made. The only reason Tony Morris’s inquiry is fair is that we forcedit to happen.

There are serious concerns about what is going on in Queensland Health. It is not acceptable forthe minister to continue saying that he did not know what was going on. It is not acceptable for peoplesuch as Toni Hoffman to be bullied, because that is what is happening out there in Queensland Health.Anyone who sticks up their head is getting it knocked off—just as it happened to Toni Hoffman. We needa complete cultural shift within Queensland Health. That culture comes from the top. It comes from theminister. We have seen what happens to anyone who speaks out. Members should talk to Con Aroney,Wendy Erglis or Toni Hoffman. They should talk to the myriad other people who are still too terrified tospeak. Those people will tell them what the culture in Queensland Health is like.

Let us not forget that 87 deaths were not a good enough reason to hold an inquiry. It was onlywhen the political heat got too much for this government to endure that it set up the inquiry. Otherwise,this situation would still be going on. If that doctor had not been named in this parliament, he would stillbe operating in Bundaberg today. He would still be killing people, he would still be harming people andthis government would still be ignoring complaints about his behaviour.

I would have liked to have spoken longer, but given that other members want to make acontribution I will stop there. I am sure further legislative changes will come out of this inquiry. Thegovernment should stand condemned for allowing the situation to occur in the first place.

Dr FLEGG (Moggill—Lib) (3.05 pm): I rise to speak to the Medical Practitioners RegistrationAmendment Bill 2005. At the outset let me say that the Liberal Party welcomes the interim report ofMr Tony Morris QC and supports the recommendations contained in that interim report. It should benoted that this bill covers one of three areas under which Mr Morris has made recommendations. In thisinterim report Tony Morris made recommendations in relation to charging Dr Patel with criminal matters;he made recommendations in relation to administrative procedures, particularly in relation to the area ofneed; and he made some legislative recommendations, which are contained in this bill that we aredebating, that tighten up some of the definitions in the legislation that the Medical Board is workingunder and in some cases increase the penalties.

These are matters of vital importance to Queenslanders. I do not believe that they should havebeen rushed through after essentially less than a day of preparation. Mr Morris’s recommendationswere tabled only this morning. That does not allow us enough time to undertake a thorough reading ofthe report and to discuss his view. On page 9 at paragraph 24, Tony Morris makes it very clear that thislegislative change was not critically urgent. That paragraph states—However, whilst these recommended amendments to the Registration Act are considered by us to be critical, they are not criticallyurgent.

Yet despite that exhortation from Commissioner Morris, the government has treated this bill as themost urgent piece of legislation that I have encountered since I entered this House. I consider that partof the reason for this is a desire on the part of the government to look good out in the public arena andbe seen as having adopted Mr Morris’s recommendations speedily. There are processes by whichlegislation before this House is assessed and any amendments are considered. All members are giventhe opportunity to speak in relation to legislation. Both the opportunity to consider the measurescontained in the legislation and the opportunity for members to speak to this bill have been wiped out bythe government’s haste, which even Mr Tony Morris did not think was reasonable.

Mr Shine: What are you doing now? You’re speaking to it. Dr FLEGG: I am sure the member has not had the time to read all the material. There are over

1,200 overseas trained doctors working in the state, most under special provisions. It is myunderstanding that the increased penalties and powers that are contained in this bill which alter theterms of the registration will not be retrospective. Given that so many overseas trained doctors alreadyworking in the system will not be caught up in these changes, it is difficult to understand the haste with


which the government is ramming this legislation through parliament. We have been given assurancesthat Tony Morris has seen this legislation and considers that it is in accordance with hisrecommendations; that, in effect, he has ticked off on it. Given the time frame in which this bill will bepassed, we can only take it on trust that these assurances that have been given are a true reflection ofMr Morris’s attitude to the bill.

The bill changes section 161 and prohibits a person not only from holding themselves out to be amedical practitioner or being eligible to be registered as a medical practitioner but also allowingthemselves to be held out by others to be eligible to practise. I would presume that the wording ‘allowhimself or herself’ implies that the registrant involved has a knowledge and understanding and wouldnot catch up an innocent person. I hope that that wording implies that there would be knowledge andintent on the part of the person and not catch somebody who Queensland Health or others have putforward.

Proposed new subsection 161(2) creates a new offence of pretending to be a doctor, not simplyby holding oneself out to be a doctor but by obtaining employment, access to a hospital or clinic or anassortment of other ways in a way that one might pretend to be a doctor, including purporting to conductautopsies, interestingly. Clearly we would not have any problems with these provisions. It strikes me asa bit unusual that the obtaining of employment fraudulently is an offence but seeking employment underfraudulent conditions is not. I can only assume that the offence of seeking employment under fraudulentconditions would come under proposed new subsection 161(1). Hopefully the minister will comment onthat in his reply, if he is listening. It strikes me that it might have been reasonable to say one who ‘seeksor obtains’ employment. Nevertheless, we do not have any problems as long as that contingency hasbeen met elsewhere.

Proposed new subsections 273(2) and 273(3) tighten up provisions in relation to falsedocumentation and significantly increase the penalties. Proposed new subsection 273(4) is interestingbecause it has a component of retrospectivity in that, if a person becomes aware of a change or an errorin any of their information or documents previously given, there is an obligation to forward thisinformation to the Medical Board and there is a penalty for not so doing. I did ask in the briefing if the billwas retrospective and the answer I was given was that it was not. This clause, then, is a bit confusingbecause it would appear to have a retrospective component.

It is not certain whether a person having previously submitted a false document or information orwhose circumstances have changed prior to the enactment of this legislation will be caught under theseprovisions and increased penalties. I would have preferred to see a clause clarifying this, saying that theprovision applies to existing registrants. I also suspect that for existing registrants there should be apartial amnesty period to allow them voluntarily to bring forward information, because it is unclear atwhat point people may become criminally liable under the provisions contained in this bill. Given thelarge numbers of doctors already in the system, I think it is important that provisions apply to existingdoctors but that time be given to them to disclose. It is in the public interest that they be encouraged todisclose.

Proposed new subsection 273(5) makes it an offence with severe penalties to practise as adoctor after having given false information or a false document to the Medical Board. Again, to my mindit is not clear what the implications are for doctors already practising who have given false information,as there are undoubtedly doctors in the system who have done so.

I note the Premier’s resistance to having the Morris inquiry in the first place, claiming that wewould not waste the money by having it. He certainly seems to have become a convert to the Morrisinquiry. I would like to very, very strongly make the following point: the introduction of this bill should notbe allowed to act as a smokescreen. There were already ample laws in place to prevent what happenedin Bundaberg. It is false to give the impression that somehow this bill is being raced through becauseotherwise we cannot stop this happening again. The laws were there. It should never have happened.We did not need this bill before the House today to stop what happened with Dr Patel in Bundaberg.

What was lacking was commonsense in applying existing laws and procedures. Administrativeprocedures were lazy and, worse than that, they did not care about the outcomes that resulted from thelazy application of administrative procedures. We do not need these laws to do some simple referencechecks. We do not need these laws to check the documents that doctors present when applying forregistration. This was laziness. This was a system that did not care how bad the outcomes would be forthe patients of Queensland. We do not need this legislation to make sure that doctors who are notnormally qualified here are assessed on the job. Queensland Health not only had the opportunity butalso had a duty of care to ensure that these doctors were assessed on their ability on the job, and it didnot do it.

People in this parliament and in the community should not be distracted that somehow this lawbrings with it important new powers. It simply redefines powers that already existed and in some casesincreases the penalties. With the procedures that were in place—and I think Mr Morris’s interim reporthas made it patently clear—the failure to adequately have the correct procedures in place is what wentwrong here. People can still break the law and tell lies to the Medical Board. All we have done with this


legislation is increase some penalties. We have to catch these doctors out. We have to catch them outby having the correct procedures and checks in place and, in particular, we should not allow people tobe bullied.

Time expired. Mr McNAMARA (Hervey Bay—ALP) (3.15 pm): I rise today in support of the Medical

Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill 2005. The interim report handed to the government todaymarks the first of what I expect will be a number of important reforms to health care in Queensland.What has occurred at the Bundaberg Base Hospital is distressing not only for the residents of that citybut also for every Queenslander and particularly for the near neighbours, such as Hervey Bay residents.Each and every member of this House will be acutely aware that the delivery of health care is an issuethat touches all of us. When we or a loved one are sick or injured we need the best treatment possibleprovided by caring and competent health professionals in modern facilities with up-to-date equipment.The reforms included in this bill, following the interim recommendations of the Morris royal commission,will assist in ensuring that we can have confidence in the doctors in whom we place our trust now and inthe future.

The bill includes a number of new provisions aimed at broadening and strengthening theregistration process for doctors. Under the bill, it will now be an offence for a prospective registrant toprovide false information or false documentation to the Medical Board of Queensland. It will also now bean offence when a person who is not a registrant represents themselves under the pretence of beingregistered to be a doctor. An offence will also be created if a doctor practises after providing falseinformation to the board. For each of these offences there will be a maximum penalty of up to 2,000penalty units or $150,000 per offence.

While the current provisions of the registration act have been clearly breached by Dr Patel, thepenalties are inadequate as they currently stand. This bill ensures that Queensland has the toughestregistration process in this country, and I wholeheartedly support those recommendations. Therecommendations in the interim report also move to address policy concerns regarding the designationof areas of need within Queensland. These recommendations are important, not just for Bundaberg butfor every area of Queensland.

Both the Premier and the minister have made statements regarding the Morris royalcommission’s interim report and the interim recommendations presented here today, and I support thecomments they have made. Changes to the policy of designating areas of need are important to ensurethat the people of Queensland, and particularly regional Queensland, can have confidence in the healthservices we are receiving. I strongly support this aspect of the royal commission’s interim report. It isclear that at no stage were these issues raised with members of the government or the minister beforethey were raised in this House. However, once being made aware, both the minister and the Premierhave acted swiftly and appropriately. This bill is yet another example of the commitment of thisgovernment to solve this problem as quickly as possible.

I am proud to be part of a government that faces up to the tough challenges and makes the hardchoices. I am proud to be part of a government that is not afraid to face the scrutiny of a royalcommission and to act on its findings and recommendations. I am proud to say that I will be part of agovernment that will always work to make things better for the people of Queensland. I commend the billto the House.

Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (3.18 pm): In rising to speak to the MedicalPractitioners Registration Amendment Bill, I wish to commend the member for Burnett, Toni Hoffmanand others who have had the backbone to keep these truths alive. I challenge both the Premier and theMinister for Health to ensure that in neither the short nor the long term will there be overt and, moreparticularly, covert retribution towards any government employee who assists in any way to uncover andmake public problems in Queensland Health, Bundaberg or elsewhere. The time frame within whichPatel was allowed to continue his reign of terror is unforgivable. The staff in Queensland Health acrossQueensland are threatened with breaches of the code of conduct in order to suppress, harass and bullystaff who in this Bundaberg case—and I know in other situations—are genuinely concerned about theirown, other staff or public safety.

This bill is intended to make early modifications to the Medical Practitioners Registration Act2001. However, there is and will be no excuse for inaction by the Premier, who has chosen to take overthis matter—to correct the lax attitude and processes of the Queensland Medical Board, thoseQueensland Health officers to whom the minister’s powers have been delegated and any QueenslandHealth officers who have a role in receiving, investigating and determining applications from anyone,particularly overseas trained doctors wishing to practise in Queensland in areas of need or, indeed,anywhere.

This legislative change is now identified as important because of Patel. However, we must neverlose sight of the fact that current legislation, if followed appropriately, would have stopped Patel’sactions. Proper checks were not carried out. Section 140 of the registration act requires that registrationas a special purpose registrant must be reviewed at intervals of six to 12 months. This did not happen.


His registration was not reviewed; his performance not genuinely checked. He was instead promotedover the protestations of those health professionals who expressed concerns but who were silenced bythe system.

That Queensland Health is currently operating on policies issued in 1996 and repealed four yearsago is totally unacceptable. That new legislation on these matters passed in 2001, four years ago, hasnot been implemented within the system is incompetent and incomprehensible. After all the trumpetingby past and current health ministers and the Premier that our health system is the best in the world, thefact that Queensland Health had to admit to the inquiry that Queensland Health has no protocols toassist with determinations under section 135 because ‘our data is not good enough’ is reprehensible.

This legislation is necessary because Queensland Health took to protecting its hierarchy ratherthan its nurses and its patients. Fixing the approval process is essential. Fixing the health system iscritical. Ensuring that those in Queensland Health responsible for this tragedy face the reality of theiractions or inactions is vital to ensure that this does not ever happen again.

Mr MESSENGER (Burnett—NPA) (3.21 pm): I rise to support the Medical PractitionersRegistration Amendment Bill 2005. In 1962 on 26 October Irene Messenger gave birth to me in theBundaberg Base Hospital, and she was born 19 years earlier in the Bundaberg Base Hospital. I canremember visiting my nana when she was sick at the Bundaberg Base Hospital, and both my brothers,Greg and Danny, were born there.

I appreciate how important the hospital and its staff of medical professionals are to mycommunity. Mum and dad lived about 20 kilometres away from the hospital in the cane fields of SouthKolan on a half acre of red dirt which had a house, a chook pen and a shed beside an outdoor dunny.Occasionally we would get a rat that would come out of the cane fields and take up residence in thetoilet, and it was my job to kill it. The way I would do that was to get a big stick, force it into a corner andthen whack it over the head. This morning during question time—indeed, since the moment this placefirst learnt of ‘Dr Death’—the Premier of this state has shown all the political cunning and agility of ashedhouse dunny rat forced into a corner. This morning the Premier of this state was forced to table thislegislation before the House—just like he was forced into calling the Morris royal commission.Remember he just wanted a CMC inquiry. Just like the Premier has been forced into calling anyinvestigation at all. He had sent his health minister to Bundaberg on 7 April with the message, ‘There willbe no investigation into “Dr Death”’ and two days later, 9 April, after the famous Hedley Thomas Googlesearch on Dr Patel, the Premier made the poor old red-faced health minister front the cameras again.This time he said, ‘Yes, there will be an investigation.’

If more than 100 people had not died and more than 2,000 families had not been affected, youwould almost feel like laughing—almost. Here we have the Premier using every political trick in thebook, scurrying this way, scurrying that way, hiding under the trouser legs and the coat-tails of the healthminister trying to avoid responsibility for the worst health disaster that this state has ever witnessed. Allof a sudden the Premier and his mates are backed into a corner, and let me tell the House that the bigstick is about to fall—hence this legislation.

Let me refresh the memory of honourable members a little. The Premier’s political henchman, themember for Stafford—no doubt under orders from the Premier—tried to reduce the political heat after Ihighlighted to this House on numerous occasions, starting with my maiden speech, the problems at theBundaberg Base Hospital, the culture of bullying and the culture of vilification of staff, of nurses. Helurched into this House on 29 September 2004 and offered these little pearls of wisdom—Earlier this year the Minister for Health wrote to all members, inviting us to bring any concerns to him or his office. He made districtmanagers available to all members, of all political persuasions, to discuss issues. This is part of the government’s commitment toopenness and accountability in the health system. But a system only works with the cooperation of members of this House whohave the welfare of their constituents at heart. The member for Burnett is untruthful, untrustworthy and not fit to represent the goodpeople of the Burnett region.

How does it feel now? This morning the member for Callide asked the Premier if he wouldapologise for the vilification and lies told about me to the House by his Labor mates. I did not ask forthat. I do not care what words the Premier says about me because whatever words come out of thePremier’s mouth are designed to increase his popularity and to save his own political skin—nothingmore, nothing less. What got me really angry was when he started talking about Toni Hoffman, the nursewhistleblower. This is the same whistleblower who came to me desperate, frightened, scared witlessand on the edge of a breakdown because of the treatment she received at the hands of a health systemcreated and nurtured by the Premier.

The other remark that the Premier made this morning was that I was just doing my job as the localmember—yes, true, I was doing my job as the local member; my duty. But I would like to remind thePremier that there is another local member—a Labor Party local member—who has been in this place alot longer than I and also has the responsibility to look after Bundaberg Hospital staff and patients. Sothe Premier, in saying that I was just doing my job, is in fact admitting that this local Labor member—themember for Bundaberg—is a dud. Unfortunately for the 87 families whose loved ones are officially beinginvestigated because of their deaths, the dud for Bundaberg was asleep on the job at best or was part ofthis Labor Party cover-up at worst.


I support this legislation wholeheartedly. Let us find Patel and bring him back here to face themusic. I am interested to hear what he has to say. What sort of deals did ‘Dr Death’ do with this PeterBeattie health department?

Hon. NI CUNNINGHAM (Bundaberg—ALP) (3.27 pm): The member for Burnett has justdisplayed what has been going on in my electorate for some time. The opposition, in a quite ruthlessattempt to win the seat of Bundaberg, has tried everything to discredit me. It has searched high and lowjust to—

Opposition members interjected. Mrs NITA CUNNINGHAM: Can I have the peace and quiet that was given to them? They have

searched high and low to justify their claim that I knew about the problems of Dr Patel for six months anddid nothing. All these months and all they could find was one letter sent to me in 2003—two years ago.It was a letter from a lady whom I will not name who was complaining about surgery done at the hospitalin 2000 and she complained about four other doctors. At the end of that letter she did mention a DrPatel, who she said refused to operate again because it would be too dangerous and she did not likewhat she called his condescending attitude. That was certainly no indication of the tragedy that has nowunfolded two years later, and it was certainly no indication of concerns about his ability as a surgeon. AsI said in a speech to this House on 21 April, and as the Acting Speaker ruled on Tuesday, I took theappropriate action. I sent the complaint to the minister at that time. I received a response. I sent that onto the lady, and I had heard no more about it.

I rise to support this bill. I am just as shocked as everyone else to hear the allegations comingforward at the Morris inquiry. I am amazed that this had been kept quietly behind the doors of ourhospital and Queensland Health. Like everyone in Bundaberg, I want answers and I want the problemsfixed. I am very grateful for the actions this government has already taken and the support being givento former patients of Dr Patel. That is certainly giving our residents confidence that these problems arebeing addressed.

In the short term this government has been absolutely committed to offering care and support tothe patients of Dr Patel. Letters have been received by 2,719 former patients of Dr Patel in Bundaberg,including all of those admitted and discharged under Dr Patel, all of those operated on and all patientswho may have seen him as outpatients. A dedicated patient liaison team is still working at the hospitalorganising assistance for former patients who require further medical treatment. The patient and staffsupport team continue to provide assistance and counselling to former patients, their families andhospital staff.

To date, 936 people have either contacted or been contacted by the patient liaison team.Following contact with the patient liaison team, former patients have been able to undergo initialassessments, discuss their case details and determine what, if any, further assistance is required.Where it has been identified that further treatment is necessary, arrangements have been made toensure these patients are treated as a matter of priority. A local private surgeon has been engaged toassist patients, and a panel of specialists in Brisbane has been established. Contact has also beenmade with local general practitioners. Patients are able to visit their family doctor for treatment if theyprefer. No patient will be out of pocket for any treatment that is necessary. The government’scommitment is to not only ensure that this tragedy is not repeated but also ensure that those who havebeen affected by what has happened in Bundaberg receive the care, attention and support that they soobviously need.

This government also acted swiftly by announcing sweeping changes in the registration andtraining of overseas trained doctors. The Medical Board immediately began moving towards changes tothe system of registration. Many of the changes have already been put into effect. The Morriscommission has already mentioned the swift action that has been taken by the board in introducing thetoughest registration system in the country.

Prior to registration, applicants will have the medical board in the country in which they trainedsend a certificate of good standing directly to the Medical Board of Queensland. They will have themedical board in any country where they practised send a certificate of good standing directly to theMedical Board, provide specific references in support of their application for registration and have therecruiting agency certify that reference checks have been undertaken. The applicants will have theirinitial qualification certified by the international credential service of the US Educational Commission forForeign Medical Graduates, pass a computer administered screening examination from July 2006 andsuccessfully pass the English language proficiency test.

After registration, most registrants will be supervised for one to three months and, if necessary,referred to the Skills Development Centre at Herston for further skills assessment. Registrantsundertaking speciality activity—such as surgery, anaesthetics and obstetrics—will be supervised by anexternal supervisor nominated by the relevant college. Within six months registrants will receiveprofessional development and training about Queensland’s legislation, Aboriginal health, women’shealth, cross-cultural training, health insurance and how best to work in the Australian health caresystem.


Registrants must complete the Australian Medical Council’s examination or the relevant specialitycollege certification within four years of the initial registration. Supervisors will be required to report onthe clinical competence of the registrant after one month, three months, six months and 12 months ineach annual registration period. Registrants will be required to undertake further clinical assessment ifan issue is raised about their competence. Supervisors must refer any issue to Queensland Health for areview of the registrant’s employment status and the board will consider any action necessary.

These initiatives will ensure that Queensland has the toughest registration system in the countryas well as ongoing monitoring, training and supervision. The passing of the Medical PractitionersRegistration Amendment Bill before the House today will enforce those sweeping changes toregistration by increasing the penalties for noncompliance.

I attended a function in Bundaberg last night. It was clear that the residents do not want any morenegativity, name calling or political games. They want the patients of Dr Patel looked after and they wantthe system fixed. They want quick and positive action. Most are satisfied that that is happening. Ourpriority must be helping the former patients of Dr Patel, ironing out the problems that have plagued ourhospital for many, many years and bringing about a better health system for all Queenslanders.

The Morris commission of inquiry is the cornerstone around which changes will occur. This bill,which has been brought forward so quickly for debate, will assure residents in my electorate, and indeedacross Queensland, that the government is committed to fixing the problems and fixing them promptly,efficiently and with compassion. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (3.36 pm): I rise to make a briefcontribution to the consideration of the Medical Practitioners Registration Amendment Bill. It will bebrief, given the time restraints that are on this debate. I participate in this debate with a heavy heart. Iparticipate in this debate sick at heart at the misinformation and the downright dishonesty that we havealready seen from the government benches in their contributions to this debate.

The member for Bundaberg’s contribution was a shameful contribution given the history and theevents that have led to us being in this House debating this legislation this afternoon. However, onething she said at the end of her contribution to the debate illustrates quite clearly the government’s intenttoday. She said—quite rightly, I believe—that this legislation is all about convincing the people ofBundaberg that the government is acting quickly to solve the problem. That is what the legislation is for.That is what it is about. That is what the member for Bundaberg said, and she is dead right. There is noother purpose for this legislation. There is no other reason for this legislation to be rushed into thisHouse today in the way that it was. This legislation provides no more opportunities for the government toget it right than it had before the passage of this legislation.

In her contribution the member for Bundaberg summed up quite clearly why we are here. We arehere to create a political perception. We are here as part of the political game that the government hasplayed ever since the political heat was turned on it in this chamber by the member for Burnett and theopposition when the government refused to act. It ignored all the other signals. Quite rightly theparliament became the last resort to put the political heat on the government. The government’sresponse since then has been a political response. The government was not prepared to respond to thehealth needs of the people of Bundaberg. It was not prepared to respond to all of the signals about howdysfunctional the health system was. The government was not prepared to respond in the face of theincreasing death toll—that it knew about, that the health department knew about, that the healthmanagers in Bundaberg knew about, that everybody knew about. It was not sufficient to get a responsefrom the government.

However, as soon as the political heat was turned on the government and it was not able toescape the political heat by vilifying those who raised the issue and it was not able to escape thepolitical scrutiny by attacking the people who had the courage to stand up and point out the problem, thegovernment kicked in to what has been a political response ever since. The whole response since thenhas been to protect their political hides. And so it is with this legislation before the House.

This legislation is before the House simply to create a political perception. It has been rushed intothe House today and forced through all its stages in two hours to give the impression to people who donot have the time or the chance to fully understand its provisions that the government is acting andacting quickly to do something that it could not have done before. That is false and it is farcical, in thesame way that the government’s response has been false and farcical from day one, because the lawsto prevent the tragedy in Bundaberg happening already exist.

The laws to pursue and prosecute those people who have done the wrong thing and committedcrimes in Bundaberg already exist. Dr Patel is only one of them. I believe that there are a number ofpeople who should eventually be called to account. The government does not need special legislation todo that. What the government needs is to take some responsibility. The government members need todo the job they were elected to do and the health department officials need to do the job they wereappointed to do—the jobs that the public has entrusted them to do.


That has been the failing. There has not been a failing of legislation. There has not been a failingthat this House needs to correct with an urgent bill rushed through on the last afternoon before a longadjournment. There has been a failing of a system that has been more focused on the government’spolitical stocks than on providing health care to the people of Queensland.

Since those failings have been revealed, we have seen a government that has been moredetermined to recover those political stocks than to fix the problems in Bundaberg. There is no greaterindication of that than the failure of the health minister to even visit Bundaberg. The minister went toBundaberg once when the issue was first raised to lecture the staff about talking to the member forBurnett. He threatened them all with a whole range of consequences if they dared to talk to anybodyabout the problems that they knew so well.

The only other time the minister went was with the Premier so that he could get his photo taken.They were there long enough to stand in front of the television cameras and have their photos taken andthen they went back to Brisbane. Any self-respecting health minister who was interested in fixing theproblem would have been in Bundaberg every week at least. He would have been there every couple ofdays in the initial stages of putting together a response to this tragedy.

The political imperative was not to be seen to be too closely responsible. The way that thepolitical spin doctors have decided to distance the government from the tragedy is to distance the healthminister and the Premier from Bundaberg and to not be too closely associated with the hospital. Theysought to blame it on the hospital management, blame it on Dr Patel and distance the government fromit. It is all part of a political strategy, just as this legislation before the House this afternoon is part of apolitical strategy. It is all part of a political strategy that is about protecting the government rather thanlooking after the people who have suffered at the hands of Dr Patel.

The tragedy is that this political strategy may well work. Given some of the successes that thisgovernment has had with its legion of spin doctors and public relations experts, it would not surprise meif this political strategy works—if the government is able to create this perception, if it is able toreconstruct history in the way that we have seen its members trying to today. I will not be surprised iftheir political strategy does work.

One thing is for sure: the member for Bundaberg, the health minister, the Premier, the member forStafford and all of the other government members who have been involved in this issue will have to livewith their consciences. They can never avoid the reality and the truth that 87 Queenslanders lost theirlives while they were responsible. That is something that no amount of political spin can ever spin away.I will never forget—and I apologise for getting upset about it—that night at the Bundaberg BrothersLeagues Club when the member for Burnett called a public meeting. I asked Rob, ‘How many people doyou think we might get?’ and he said, ‘We might get 25 or 30.’ Two hundred and fifty people turned upthat night to tell their tragic stories. Anybody who was there could not help but be touched by it. Anybodywho was there could not help but be moved and affected by it forever. That is the result of the chronicfailure of the member for Bundaberg and the chronic failure of the Minister for Health. That is the resultwhen a health system is allowed to deteriorate in favour of political spin, silly grins, politicalreconstructions and dishonesty the like of which no government should be allowed to get away with.

The government may well get away with it, but it does not deserve to. It does not deserve toexercise the responsibility that the people of Queensland have given it. The government can exercisethat responsibility without this legislation before the House. It failed to exercise it when it had the tools todo it; there is no guarantee that this legislation will ensure that it does exercise that responsibility. Thislegislation does not mean that that responsibility will be exercised any better.

Time expired. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (3.46 pm): I rise to support the Medical Practitioners

Registration Amendment Bill before the House. What happened in Bundaberg was terrible and no-one—no-one in this House or outside—wants patients harmed. No person or government can stop allcases of abuse, whether that abuse be within the family, within the community group, in the workplaceor even in a hospital. The key criterion is, with what is known at the time, did the individual or thegovernment act in a timely and responsible manner? There have been criticisms of the government, ofthe minister and the member for Bundaberg about their responses, but both the minister and themember have explained clearly what they knew and when they knew those things. In all cases theyresponded to the information at hand.

Mr Messenger interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr English): Order! Member for Burnett.Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: The member for Cunningham said that these things were known in May

2003. Mr Copeland: That’s when the complaints were made.Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Cunningham.Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: No, they were not. Their own member for Burnett, under oath at the

commission, has sworn that he only knew the details of Dr Patel the Friday before the issue was raisedin the parliament.


Mr Copeland interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Cunningham. That is my final warning.Mr Messenger interjected. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Member for Burnett. That is my final warning. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: Their own member for Burnett, under oath, has sworn that he only knew

the details of Dr Patel the Friday before he raised the issue in parliament on the following Tuesday.Using the opposition’s own principles, in hindsight it could be asked—

Mr COPELAND: Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The member is deliberatelymisleading the House. These complaints were made by Toni Hoffman back 2003.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: Using the opposition’s own principles, in hindsight it could be asked: why

did the opposition or the member for Burnett, if they had the details of Dr Patel’s action on the Friday, notmake contact on the Monday in Brisbane with the Health Rights Commission, the CMC, the minister orthe Medical Practitioners Board? The opposition made the decision that its timely response was not toreport these matters to those relevant authorities but to discuss it in their party room on the Mondayafternoon and then wait to raise it in the parliament on the Tuesday. If the opposition appearscomfortable with this course of action it could hardly be critical of the Premier introducing this bill today.The Premier could have waited almost two months until parliament resumed after the estimateshearings or he could have acted with speed and urgency. He has chosen the latter so that therecommendations from Commissioner Morris and the deputy commissioners can be implementedimmediately.

In one of the most important weeks of the parliamentary year, the budget week, there has beenfull, unfettered debate on the budget and the government has found time to implement thecommissioner’s first set of recommendations. I hope we do not discover down the track that theopposition delayed acting on information it had received so that the political impact took precedenceover the medical imperatives. History will judge whether the behaviour of those opposite in political pointscoring helped the doctor in question to flee the country.

When the Minister for Health, Gordon Nuttall, made a statement to this House and then wrote toall members in April and May 2004 he pleaded with the members of this House to work in the interest ofpatients and not politicians. The member for Burnett, having obtained evidence of concern regarding theclinical practices of Dr Patel, waited until after he brought this evidence to the party room and thenwaited again until he raised the issues in parliament and only then did he send the material to theminister’s office. That was his timely response. He is comfortable with that. The Leader of theOpposition is comfortable with that. All opposition members are comfortable with that. In contrast, thegovernment has acted immediately today to implement Commissioner Morris’s recommendationsconcerning this aspect of the inquiry. The Premier is to be congratulated on his speedy and decisiveactions in bringing about the recommendations from the independent inquiry.

During his contribution a short time ago the member for Moggill said that this legislation had beenrushed in and that because it was not retrospective doctors in the system today who have may haverorted the system or rorted their qualifications would not be caught up. That is not true. Any doctorworking in the Queensland system today who has falsely claimed credentials or who is rorting thesystem in any way is caught up in the legislation because the doctor is practising in the system today.

What would have to happen is that doctor would have to resign by midnight tonight and no longerbe working in Queensland Health to escape this legislation. From tomorrow, any doctor who has falselyclaimed any qualifications or is practising in a deceitful or dishonest way will be caught up in thislegislation and will face the penalties that will be imposed.

The member for Burnett in his contribution mentioned that I had acted under orders from thePremier. He is wrong. He certainly does not know how our Labor caucus operates. He mentioned that inSeptember 2004 I had made a comment about his activities. That is correct. Within a short space of timethe member for Burnett had claimed major crises in every area of activity within his electorate. This wassix months before the member for Burnett was—

Mr MESSENGER: I rise to a point of order. What the member for Stafford has said is incorrect. Idid not claim crises in every area of my community.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr English): Order! There is no point of order. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: I take the member’s interjection. I think that he is more correct than I am.

He claimed it in six areas—primary industries, sugar, education, child safety, transport and I forget whatthe other one was.

Mr Messenger: I claimed a crisis in health.Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: I know. We are talking about that. I am talking about the other areas. Part

of the problem is to that when someone cries wolf in every area—Mr Messenger interjected.


Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Burnett is warned under standing order 253. Mr TERRY SULLIVAN: When a member cries wolf in every area of activity it is sometimes hard

to know what is legitimate and what is not.In summary, the Premier has acted with speed and decisiveness in responding to the

independent commissioner’s recommendations. This legislation will tighten some loopholes in thecurrent legislation. It should be supported by all members of the House.

Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (3.53 pm), in reply:If this legislation is passed by the House it will become law today. It will be effective as of a second pastmidnight—that is early this morning—which means that anyone who breaches the act from this dayforward, including today, will feel the full force of the law.

I want to begin my contribution by reminding members of what this bill is about. It is aboutimplementing immediately the recommendations of the royal commission. It is not about politicalstrategy, gains or any other nonsense, nor is it about political spin. It is about the immediateimplementation of the recommendations made by Tony Morris QC and his deputies today. That is what itis all about. I make no apology for moving fast. I thank the commissioners again for their prompt anddiligent work and their fierce independence in providing today’s recommendations.

What opposition members do in this regard is complain and attack. When we act and do the rightthing they still complain and whinge because they are interested in politics. They are not interested insolutions or the patients.

Let me start by thanking all members for their contributions to the debate. I do appreciate thesupport of all sides of parliament for this legislation that the government has introduced. I amdisappointed to hear that the member for Southern Downs thinks this may be a facade. I assure themember that it is not. It is very serious indeed. It is about people’s lives, as we know. It is also aboutimplementing the recommendations of an independent royal commission headed by a fiercelyindependent person.

I remind everyone that this inquiry did not come from the man on the moon. This inquiry wasestablished by my government following a cabinet decision on my recommendation, supported by theMinister for Health. We appointed a fiercely independent person in Tony Morris to carry out this inquiry.Frankly, morally we had a duty to do so.

Opposition members interjected.Mr BEATTIE: They interject. Let the record show that. Let the record show that when we are

bringing in positive legislation to try to resolve these issues, to try improve things for the future, theinterjections continue.

The point is very simple. We wanted someone fiercely independent. We wanted to make sure thatthe recommendations of the royal commission, like the accurate recommendations today, wouldimprove the situation so this never happens again. That is what we wanted to do and that is what hashappened. Therefore, the interim report justifies the government’s decision to set up a royal commissionand to put someone fiercely independent in charge of it.

Yes, it is true that initially I felt that the CMC should investigate this. I contacted the head of theCMC and he indicated that while it may investigate some aspects, which it is doing, it would not conducta broad-ranging inquiry. We could have walked away from that, but we did not. I promised that therewould be an inquiry and the minister supported that. So what did we do? We did not run away from it.We established this royal commission.

Let me make it clear that nobody forced us into doing anything. We did it because it was the rightthing to do, it was the moral thing to do, and the people of Bundaberg were entitled to nothing less. Thisinquiry was established by the government to make sure that we got to the bottom of these issues sothat they never happen again. If we wanted to appoint someone who was going to simply do thegovernment’s bidding we would not have appointed Tony Morris. He is fiercely independent. I stand byhis appointment. Yes, it is true that some people thought that the government was mad to appoint him. Itwas not about that; it was about ensuring that we got someone independent, who would be seen to beindependent, to get to the bottom of this issue and then we could fix it up. We acted honourably anddecently from the beginning. The action today confirms that.

I am also disappointed to hear allegations from the Leader of the Opposition that the media hadthe report before 9 am. To the best of my knowledge, the report was not provided to the media beforebeing handed to me by the commissioner and the deputy commissioners. While I appreciate that theopposition would have liked more time to peruse the bill, unfortunately that was not possible in this timeframe.

I provided as much information as I possibly could in the time available. As the Leader of theOpposition is aware, I rang him straight after cabinet had considered the report and I offered animmediate briefing. The briefing took place at 12 o’clock. I thank him for attending. I thank his shadowminister and also the Leader of the Liberal Party and the member for Moggill for coming. The briefing


was attended by the Minister for Health and in part by the Leader of the House and my departmentalrepresentatives.

The briefing was provided at noon to provide as much opportunity as possible for the member toattend. I invited the Liberal Party to attend. While not able to personally contact the Independents, Iinvited them to attend when I delivered my ministerial statement this morning.

While the Leader of the Opposition alleges that these amendments will not fix procedures, I canadvise him that on page 9 of the commission’s interim report it states—... we are fully satisfied that the Board ... And it goes on to state—has also taken prompt, appropriate and rigorous steps to ensure that such mistakes and oversights do not happen again.

I reiterate that my government has responded quickly by setting up the inquiry. I am disappointedthat the member is concerned about accessing the interim report. I stress that this interim report wasreleased at 9 o’clock this morning. We have wasted no time in implementing all of its recommendationsin full. That is why we are debating the bill that implements the required legislative changes. As I saidbefore, they will be effective from today.

The member for Southern Downs also raised the issue of promotion taking place without properassessment. I can advise that the Minister for Health has agreed with the AMA on an audit of thecompetency of all overseas trained doctors. That was the point the Leader of the Opposition raised. Ialso remind the House that the minister and I opened the Skills Development Centre at the RoyalBrisbane Hospital late last year to which the minister referred. Peter Forster’s health system reviewshould also assist in improving systems to ascertain if medical practitioners are performing within theirskills set. This also builds on announcements made earlier this year for the Patient Safety Centre andthe Clinical Practice Improvement Centre. Peter Forster will also make recommendations with regard tocultural change to get rid of the alleged bullying referred to by the member for Cunningham.

I am amazed that the members opposite are critical of the government for moving too quickly toimplement these recommendations of the royal commission. What more can we do? For heaven’s sake,sometimes we have to put politics aside. Here we are trying to implement the recommendations of theinquiry as quickly as possible. To do otherwise would have meant a two-month delay. Those oppositehave examined what the commissioner said. Point 24 states—However, whilst these recommended amendments to the Registration Act are considered by us to be critical, they are not criticallyurgent.But they are critical nevertheless. Further down in point 27 he says—It is a matter for the Government—and, ultimately, for the Parliament—whether the amendments which we are recommendingshould be adopted immediately, or should await a more comprehensive revision of the Registration Act.

There is no way in the world we were going to wait. Here is a recommendation from anindependent royal commission. Under those circumstances, if he says the law should be changed in anarea like this, then it will be changed, and that is exactly what we have done. Anyone who possiblyargues against these changes being made today does so for crude, vulgar political reasons and not inthe interests of the people of Bundaberg or the people of this state. Surely if a government has hadidentified for it issues by a royal commission that need amendment to an act—obvious ones like this—then why would we sit on our tails and do nothing about it? We have an obligation to do something aboutit, and that is exactly what we have done. I urge the opposition to, for once in its life, put the politicsaside and put the people first.

When it comes to patient safety, we cannot move too quickly. We established a royal commissionto get answers. We have been given some answers, and now we are implementing them. As Imentioned this morning, members have actually suggested that we should wait two more months untilthe House sits again in August to implement these changes. Surely that is not their position. If onelistened to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, that seems to be what he is saying. That is anunsustainable position. He should go and tell the people of Bundaberg that that is his view. I know whatwill happen to him if he does.

The member for Moggill queried whether in new section 161 the phrase ‘hold himself or herselfout’ could capture an innocent bystander. The answer is no. The phrase is meant to capture the intent,the state of mind of a person holding himself or herself out. This means that one would really have tointend to mislead. That phrase is a continuation of the existing phrase in the legislation. The memberalso queried subsections (4) and (5) of section 273 and whether they would apply retrospectively, and Ithought the member for Stafford dealt with this effectively. Subsection (4) states that a person mustclarify with the board that something they told it previously was in fact false or has become false.Subsection (5) says that a registrant must not continue to practise as a registrant if the person has giventhe board something they knew was false at the time of registration. That is the crucial point. That is thepoint.

Section 273, like all new offences, applies prospectively. These are stringent new requirementsfor true, positive and open disclosure to the Medical Board, an ongoing stringent new responsibility onregistrants—all registrants, both new and existing—to ensure that the information and documents


provided to the board were and remain correct and accurate. The government does not resile from this.The Minister for Health will write to the Medical Board to make sure the message about practitioners’new responsibilities gets out there in the community. They will all be told. No-one will have anyopportunity for any excuse at any time from now on.

I agree with the commission of inquiry that the existing penalties relating to the registration are toolow. We are fixing this today with this bill. The Medical Board supports these new penalties, as does thegovernment, to ensure that this situation never occurs again. For the first time, we have createdoffences that specifically relate to the giving of false information to the board at the time of or in relationto registration. Whereas currently the offence relates to providing information to the board generally andis penalised with 50 penalty points or $3,750, the new offences concerning misinformation to the boardin relation to registration are penalised with 2,000 penalty units or $150,000 or up to three yearsimprisonment—up to three years imprisonment! All along I have said that this is about getting to thebottom of what happened at Bundaberg and fixing the problems in the health system. That is what thisbill is about. As I said before, and I say it again: I make no apology for moving quickly. I make noapology for moving fast on this. Again, I thank the commissioners for their prompt and diligent work andtheir fierce independence in providing today’s recommendations.

I have to again put on the record my appreciation for the work done by Tony Morris and hiscommissioners. The reality is that he has moved at the speed of greased lightning. That is what thecommunity expects. That is what the community wants. When people are going through the pain, as thepeople in Bundaberg are, they want not only to ensure that justice is done—and this interim report startsthe process of real justice—but also to ensure that the system is improved so that it never happensagain. But for them—for those who have loved ones or know people who have been through thistrauma—they want to know justice is done. They want to see that justice is done. That is actually part ofthe healing process, and that is why this report is so important.

I also thank the Minister for Police and Corrective Services, Judy Spence, and the policecommissioner for responding quickly to the government’s suggestions or requests or directions—however one wants to put it—to move as quickly as possible to have Patel returned to Queensland toface justice. What has happened out of this? There were three elements to this report. There were thelegislative changes. We have made those and they are done today. There are the administrativerecommendations, and I have spelt out the action that the minister will take in relation to thoserecommendations and he will come back to cabinet on 25 June 2005 to ensure support for that newpolicy in relation to administrative recommendations. Lastly, of course, there are the charges againstPatel which will be dealt with by the police. So those three aspects as of now are being dealt with orhave been dealt with.

I want to refer again to the comments made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, who seemedto spend most of his time deriding the government for its attempt to bring this legislation in today. I referhim again to Tony Morris’s report, in particular paragraphs 24 and 27. I also make this point: this crisisrequires people to be focused on actually assisting those who have gone through pain. Surely we havegot to the stage where this is not about politics. Surely this is not about the government trying tocongratulate itself, which it has not done. Surely this is not about the opposition trying to congratulateitself or any of its members. This is not about journalists trying to win Walkley Awards or planning towrite books or newspapers increasing circulation. It is none of that. If people are fair dinkum and serioushere, this is about an objective exercise to improve the system so this never happens again.

I know we cannot take self-interest out totally when it comes to politics. I understand all of that,and I understand that the opposition has a right to pursue these things, and so do newspapers. Buteverybody, government included, has to contain their passion, if you like, for self-congratulatorybehaviour or ego trips or self-praise. What we have to do is be humble in this. We have to rememberthat people have gone through an enormous amount of pain. People have died. It does not matter whois doing this. It does not matter whether it is the government or the opposition or whether it is thenewspapers involved. That is irrelevant. What is relevant is the benefits that go to the people ofQueensland. I would say to government, opposition, newspapers, everyone: let us put our egos in a boxand think first about the people of Bundaberg—that is what is important here—and how to improve thesystem.

It does not matter who is in office, from time to time problems will occur about which thegovernment of the day may not be aware. The test of a good government is what it does when such aproblem arises. Does the government hide it? The answer is no. The government has the guts to dowhat we did and that is set up a royal commission with a royal commissioner who is known in legalcircles not to favour the government side of politics but who is a person of impeccable integrity and whois an honest person who is prepared to get to the truth. A lesser government would not have had theguts to do what we did and are doing. We have done that because this is about helping people. I do notlook for any accolades for the government at all. We are not about that. We are about providingleadership and saying that we need to fix this problem. That is exactly what we are trying to do.


Sometimes the speeches of the Leader of the Opposition in this place are more disappointingthan his behaviour privately. In the meeting that we had with him and in my conversation with him thismorning, I found him genuine in trying to work with us to resolve this matter. The fact that he has comeinto this place today and will vote with the government on this legislation is an acknowledgement that heis genuine to that extent. I acknowledge that. The Liberal Party has done the same. I gather theIndependents will do the same.

Yes, we can play the blame game. But we also have to play the fix-it game. We have to worktogether—and this is what the community wants us to do—to get these things right. The Deputy Leaderof the Opposition seemed to be more concerned that we were going to get out of jail politically by doingthe right thing. We do not know whether we are going to get out of jail. Who knows? We could lose thenext election. The politics of this issue are totally irrelevant. What is relevant is that, when a royalcommissioner’s report is received, the government does the right thing with it. We did not try to hide it.We did not try to move away from it. I want to make this very clear. We had a choice. We could have saton this report for two months or we could have got off our bums and done something with it. That isexactly what we did. We chose to do something with it.

It may well be that a number of us who are heading for a party conference may not get therewhen we were scheduled to. So what. That is not important. What is important is our determination to fixup this issue. That is why we rearranged the world to do it. Frankly, we have to be flexible enough anddetermined enough to rearrange our schedules and to rearrange the parliamentary process to do thebidding of the will of the people. Otherwise this parliament becomes irrelevant. Our responsibility is touse the legislative arm of this parliament to benefit the people of this state.

Although I thank those opposite for their support, I am not going to hide the fact that some of thecomments of the members opposite were disappointing. But in the spirit of trying to provide someleadership and working together, I have not gone into those to the extent that I otherwise would have. Ido not think that is conducive to achieving a sensible outcome. We seem to have a unanimous positionin the parliament to support this legislation that was introduced by the government.

One matter that I have not shared with the House is that we have consulted the commissioner,Tony Morris, and he has indicated that the clauses before the House are consistent with hisrecommendations. We have done that to ensure that the legislation that we are passing achieves theobjectives that Tony Morris set out to achieve in his recommendations. I have a moral obligation toadvise the House of that and I do so. When the final report is brought down—and I do not know whetherthere will be more interim reports; I will be happy to meet with Mr Morris to achieve that—we will moveas quickly on that as we have moved on this interim report.

Motion agreed to.

Consideration in DetailClause 1, as read, agreed to. Clause 2—Mr SPRINGBORG (4.14 pm): This is the most appropriate point for me to raise these matters

because they are policy issues and are covered within the objectives of the bill. A moment ago thePremier mentioned our commitment to this issue. Today I made it very clear to the Premier that we werecommitted to passing this legislation through the parliament and that we would support it in a bipartisanway. There has never been any equivocation on that. We were very concerned about the time frame inwhich this legislation would go through the House, because it is very difficult to analyse all of it in a shorttime frame. Even though from time to time debates on bills are truncated, often members have a day inwhich to read a bill and to gauge community opinion about it. Today I rang Tony Morris to see if he hadany issues with the legislation. He said that the amendments, as presented to the parliament today,accurately reflect his aspirations as contained within his report. Given that in passing theseurgent amendments we are relying upon his work, then I trust what he is seeking to achieve, I trust whathe has said, and I trust that the government’s drafting of these clauses is in accordance with that.

Also, the Premier has made much of what we have done in parliament today. I do not think thatwe had a choice to do anything else. It was the right thing to do.

Mr Beattie: I agree. Mr SPRINGBORG: Today was the last day of this sittings of parliament. We had to pass this

legislation today. We really had no other choice. The parliament was going to sit today and it wouldprobably still be sitting now even if we were not passing this legislation. It was an appropriate time for usto pass this legislation.

My question relates to the issue of promotion without assessment. The Premier referred to it inhis reply. This is one of the key issues that caused the problems at Bundaberg Base Hospital. Therewere certainly some failings with the medical registration board in terms of it not properly checking thecertificates of good standing or any of those other documents or doing the things that it should have


done in relation to doctors. It is also correct to say that if Dr Patel had practised at the Bundaberg BaseHospital at the level at which he was appointed, which was principal medical officer, then no operationswould have been performed. That is my point. The incompetence would have been the failing and notthe proper checking of doctors’ qualifications.

The issue that I am concerned about is that there is nothing contained in this legislation—or inanything that I have seen—that stops that practice or curtails it. The Premier has said that the ministerand his department are undertaking an audit of competencies of those people who to date have beenpromoted without assessment. That is fair enough. Hopefully that will fix those particular issues. Theissue is that there is nothing—other than the public spotlight itself and the desire to avoid these sorts ofPatel circumstances arising in the future—that curtails or prescribes a methodology or seeks toseriously restrict by way of policy objective or legislation the capacity of Queensland Health to do that.

An opposition member: And it’s still not happening. Mr SPRINGBORG: It is still not happening even with this legislation. The Premier might say that

that matter was not contained in Tony Morris’s recommendations. It is an important point. I will say itagain. If people in Queensland Health had not promoted Patel beyond his capacity without assessment,then there would not have been any operations performed and we would not be facing this situation.Was it considered that there should have been an amendment along those lines put into this legislation?If not, why not? Is the Premier proposing to introduce an amendment at some future time? This is acrucial issue. It has to be addressed at some time because it is the fundamental issue. We are fixing asituation today which, by and large, if there had been proper oversight, would not have happened.Legislation is only as good as the commitment and the resources of the bodies that have to work withinits jurisdiction.

This is the key issue. It is a problem because we still have consultant physicians who have beenpromoted without assessment. Some of those people are practising in the areas of psychiatry andobstetrics and gynaecology. Of course, the Premier would say that some of those people could be dealtwith through a retrospective assessment of competencies. But we still have this very grey area, which isa very serious issue that led to this whole problem arising. What is going to be done about it? Why isnothing being done?

Mr BEATTIE: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. I am not being pedantic whenI say that this is not about promotions; it is about overseas trained doctors being assessed in the jobthey are in. The member for Moggill will understand what I am saying. It is about people being assessedin the job they are in; it is not so much to do with promotions. I am not going to go on about it but that iswhat it is. The board has addressed this through the changes in the renewal and reassessment process.I think one of the useful things we can do—and I say this to the Minister for Health—is to organise abriefing with the Leader of the Opposition and some departmental people about what the Medical Boardhas done because the board has addressed this. It has changed the renewal and reassessmentprocess, and that impacts on the job and the assessment of the job that the person is in.

Let me come back to what I said before. The Leader of the Opposition raised this issue. I want toconfirm that the Minister for Health has agreed with the AMA on an audit of the competency of alloverseas trained doctors. What the Leader of the Opposition is on about, with respect, is the role thosedoctors play within the hospital. So what the Minister for Health has agreed to do with the AMA is assessthose overseas doctors and their competency in the position they are in because this is the decision.Once the decision is made that they are in this position, the question is: are they competent to carry outthe job for the position they are in? That is what it is about. As I said, the Medical Board has changed therenewal and reassessment process to achieve that. We also have this agreement involving the ministerand the AMA about assessing the competency of overseas doctors in their positions. I also want tomention the skills development centre at the Royal Brisbane hospital, which Gordon and I opened lastyear. All the feedback the minister and I have received has been incredibly positive.

I think I have actually answered specifically the Leader of the Opposition’s question. It is notabout promotions; it is about the role that they are designated in. The board now has new assessmentcriteria and we have this reassessment of existing doctors. We now have a change in the board rule asto who gets put into those positions in future. So that overcomes the problem with regard to whathappens in the future. In relation to the current problem, the Minister for Health has agreed with theAMA to do a competency assessment of all the overseas trained doctors in the positions they are in, asI understand it. I think I have this right. I have a nod from the head of the Medical Board. He tells me thatI have that right. To the best of my ability, that is the situation as I understand it. It might be useful if wegot a briefing.

I am advised that the minister has also asked Queensland Health to speak to all supervisors of allhospitals to ensure medical practitioners are performing within their skills. I know that the Leader of theOpposition is serious about this; he has raised it a number of times publicly, and he has raised it twicetoday. I think I have given the detailed answer about what will happen in the future and what will happento the current doctors. What I just said, again, means that the minister has asked Queensland Health tospeak to all supervisors of all hospitals to ensure medical practitioners are performing within their skills.If the Leader of the Opposition thinks about what I have said, if these measures had been in place in


Bundaberg, as I understand it, then Patel would not have been in the position to do what he did, which iswhat the Leader of the Opposition is trying to get to. To the best of my understanding, I think that iscorrect. I have an indication that what I have said is correct.

Mr SPRINGBORG: I have one last point of clarification. I understand where the Premier iscoming from. He is saying that the amendments before the House today will address the issues ofdeficiencies within the medical registration process. I understand about the fraudulent presentation ofdocuments and all of those sorts of things. I understand that particular issue. That was one part of thefailing. The other part of the failing was that these people were promoted by what has been calleddeeming—promotion without appropriate assessment or understanding of their particular skills.

Mr Beattie: That is what I have been talking about. Mr SPRINGBORG: Okay. The Premier has said to the parliament, as I understand it—and let me

get this clear—that this particular skills audit that will be undertaken by agreement with the AMAQ willassess the particular skills of all of those people in our hospital system.

Mr Beattie: Overseas trained doctors. Mr SPRINGBORG: It will assess the skills of those overseas trained doctors. Mr Beattie: Gordon has said it will. Mr SPRINGBORG: Okay. So, if there are any deficiencies, they will be picked up in the current

positions they are in. If it is robust enough, it will pick them up. I understand that. It will also ensure amore robust process of monitoring those overseas trained doctors in the area they are actuallypractising in in the hospital. My issue is still with the capacity that exists within Queensland Health todeem or promote a practitioner within this area of need. Is the Premier saying that because he fixed thisat the front that that is not going to happen or is he going to do something else? Will Queensland Healthstill be able to promote or deem these people in these areas without an appropriate assessment ofskills? That is my question. That is what caused this problem in the first place. I understand how wemight be properly working on the certification of those doctors coming in, but there still seems to me tobe a grey area around the capacity of Queensland Health officers to promote people in these areas ofneed. That is what my issue is.

Mr BEATTIE: The minister will arrange for the CEO of the board to brief the Leader of theOpposition about this because the board addressed this and it has changed the renewal andreassessment process. So we think this is covered. The second thing I want to say is that the reason itis not stated here in any amendments today is that it was not covered in Tony Morris’s report.

Mr Springborg: I understand that. Mr BEATTIE: The Leader of the Opposition accepts that. This is what happens: on renewal of

registration of a doctor, a change in position leads to cessation of registration and requires a newapplication for registration. So they then have to go through the process again and the person’s skillscan be assessed again. Then a determination can be made about whether there is someone in thesystem who does not comply or who is trying to work outside his or her skills.

I understand the point that the Leader of the Opposition is making. Now, as a result of all thisbeing tidied up, we are dealing with the problem. We have a mechanism in place to deal with the issuesthat have been raised. The minister has indicated that he is prepared to organise for the CEO to briefthe Leader of the Opposition. One of his staff will be there, of course. If the Leader of the Opposition stillhas any outstanding issues on this—because I know it is an important area—then we are prepared tohear his view and take his advice on board. We believe that we have covered this. We believe that wehave now addressed this issue.

Clause 2, as read, agreed to. Clauses 3 to 8, as read, agreed to.

Third ReadingBill read a third time.



Resumed from p. 2109.Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (4.29 pm), in reply:

As Acting Treasurer, I would like to thank all members who have spoken on the appropriation bills. OnTuesday the Treasurer presented a budget to the parliament of Queensland that I considered to be oneof the most significant budgets in Queensland’s history. It is a budget that includes $5 billion in tax cuts


over the next seven years, including the abolition of $3.5 billion in state taxes and major reforms to theland tax system that will save taxpayers some $1.5 billion over the same period, and keeps us in themost competitive tax position of any state in Australia.

It is a budget that has laid the foundation for an unprecedented expansion of the state’sinfrastructure. No government in the history of Queensland has had an infrastructure plan like this. Iknow people talk about the Joh days. Well, let me tell them that we have succeeded in achieving anoutcome that is much more significant than the Joh days. It is the biggest in the state’s history. It investsin Queensland’s human capital through a range of initiatives designed to promote research anddevelopment and give opportunities to Queensland students to excel and advance.

The 2005-06 budget also delivers on major initiatives and funding enhancements to assist thedisabled and the homeless, and again demonstrates our unequivocal commitment to child safety. Thishas been a budget with heart. The economic outcome for Queensland remains the envy of other states,with strong economic and employment growth, and continues this government’s proud record. It isregrettable but hardly surprising that, having been presented with this awesome budget, the oppositionhas chosen not to engage the government on these major issues. Instead, the budget reply turns out tobe very similar to replies to our previous budgets, and unfortunately it repeats much of the opposition’smisinterpretation in areas it also made on those occasions. That disappoints me because this budget isabout building the new Queensland. It is the bricks and mortar, the brain power and also the provision ofservices to those in need—everything from education to health and disabilities; you name it.

The opposition’s contribution is backed by the publication of a four-page brochure calledOpposition Analysis Budget Paper No. 4, which I read with some mirth. The opposition published asimilar brochure with a picture of three balloons on the front page for the 2003-04 budget. Do membersremember that?

Mr Reeves: I remember that—very successful! Mr BEATTIE: That publication went down like a lead balloon, and this one is undoubtedly headed

for the same fate. The first claim by the opposition is that a budget deficit in 2005-06 is being averted by cash from

the Commonwealth. This is on the basis that, if we deduct growth in Commonwealth payments from thebudget surplus of $934 million, then the budget would be deficient to the tune of $84 million. We couldlook at any government, any household or any business budget and claim that if we did not receive oneparticular revenue stream then there would be a deficit—like if we did not have a pay packet we wouldbe in deficit. Fortunately, most people do not look at their budgets in such a juvenile way.

The facts are that Queensland, like all states and territories, receives roughly 50 per cent of itsfunding from the Commonwealth. This is thanks to the very high level of vertical fiscal imbalance in thiscountry. It is plainly ridiculous, therefore, to take out the growth component of Commonwealth paymentsas a legitimate funding source. The GST was meant to be a growth tax. I was there. Bob Carr and I arethe last two premiers who were there for the negotiations. It was meant to be a growth tax. We need agrowth tax. We need growth income. We are a growing state. We are the engine room of Australia. Howcan we deal with it without looking at its growth?

Indeed, there are plenty of arguments in support of greater funding from the Commonwealth in awhole range of areas. Just look at AusLink. We do not get our fair share for roads, education, disabilityservices, health in particular, and so on. The Queensland government’s approach to budgeting,therefore, stands in stark contrast to the juvenile approach promoted by the opposition in thispublication. It would get a failing mark from any year 12 economics teacher.

The Queensland government first calculates how much it is likely to collect in revenue in eachyear and then bases its policy and spending decisions around that assessment of available revenue,and that is the way we work.

The next claim made by the opposition is that tax collections have increased markedly under thisgovernment and by 2008-09 will reach $8 billion, approximately double the taxation revenue of 1997-98,which was the last year the opposition was in power. Then it compares that to expected populationgrowth of 23 per cent over the same period to make out that we are greedy. What a doozey! Whatcomplete rot! This so-called analysis completely ignores the impact of inflation and economic growth.

One of the natural outcomes of having a strong economy with a growth rate significantly higherthan the national average is that tax collections will also grow. At the same time, this government’srecord of spending in areas such as health, education, social welfare and infrastructure is also growing.We make absolutely no apologies for this. We are about correcting the mean-spirited and gross neglectof the past of those opposite. The fact remains that on any reasonable measure Queensland continuesto have the most competitive tax system of any state in Australia, particularly the one used by theCommonwealth Grants Commission, which puts our taxation effort at the lowest in Australia.

Further, as a proportion of the economy, the state government’s tax take is actually forecast todecrease from 4.8 per cent of gross state product in 1997-98 under the coalition to only 4.2 per centnext year. I just say to the Leader of the Opposition: you will be hearing a bit more about that as theyears roll by—or the months at least. Over the forward years, with the budget’s tax cuts cutting in, the


ratio falls even lower to four per cent by 2008-09. The opposition got it completely wrong. We in fact aretaking less out of the economy in taxation than it did, not more.

Let me also address the issues of royalties and the assertion that the government shouldsomehow be embarrassed by the contribution of the mining industry to the budget. Why should we? Theminerals that are being extracted do not belong to the industry—an important industry that it is, and onethat I strongly support. Those minerals belong to the people of Queensland. Royalties are themechanism by which Queenslanders, through the government, are compensated for their extraction.The government feels no shame whatsoever in using these funds to provide services to thecommunity—and why should we?

The claim that the government is raiding the profits of the energy sector GOCs has again beengiven prominence by the opposition. The opposition quotes figures of $601 million for 2004-05 and$635 million for 2005-06. To describe these payments as cash raids is just ridiculous. Again, it has beenmischievous in its so-called analysis. The $635 million in 2005-06 includes a figure of $225 million in taxequivalent payments to be made by the energy sector’s GOCs. These are payments made under thenational tax equivalence regime—a national regime—designed to ensure competitive neutralitybetween government owned corporations and private corporations across Australia. I have to say thatthis is a pretty embarrassing thing for the opposition to do. It does not actually understand what ishappening in electricity.

The scheme is administered now by—guess who?—the Australian Taxation Office. It is not evenadministered by us. It ensures that GOCs have no competitive advantage on taxation grounds overprivately owned rivals. One can only describe that as a real goof. On constitutional grounds, the revenuecomes to the state. So let us hear no more of this nonsense of adding tax equivalents to dividends as aso-called raid on GOCs. It is just misleading garbage—just rubbish.

On the other hand, though, the opposition conveniently overlooks the other side of the equation. Iguess we would expect that. The state is budgeting to pay very significant community service obligationpayments of $1.34 billion in 2005-06 in order to ensure delivery of key policy outcomes as the uniformelectricity tariff and Citytrain services. As well, we are budgeting to pay $271 million in 2005-06 in equityinjections to Queensland Rail, Central Queensland Port Authority and Queensland Motorways to assistin the provision of new infrastructure. I would have thought the opposition would support those injectionsinto infrastructure. That is over $1.6 billion we are paying to our GOCs in 2005-06 as opposed to thetotal dividend revenue we are expecting of $628 million. Even they can work out what that means—Ihope.

Within that total GOC flow of funds in the energy sector, after taking into account communityservice obligation payments to that sector, the net flows to government are expected to be only$60 million in 2005-06—down from $318 million in 2004-05. No dispassionate analysis could everreasonably claim that such a budget was raiding the GOCs. It is in fact quite the opposite. Onlysomeone after a fast headline would count on people not making a reasonable assessment of the fullsituation. There it is; it is on the record and they cannot argue with it. Many economists will tell themwhat I said is accurate.

Sadly, the errors and misinformation do not end there. Over recent years the Deputy Premier andTreasurer and the Minister for Transport and Main Roads have tried on many occasions to explain toMr Springborg and the other members of the opposition why we cannot compare the roads budget in thefinal year of the Borbidge-Sheldon government with the roads budget now. There are items that wereincluded in the budget back then, in particular road maintenance funding, which are not consideredcapital expenditure under accrual accounting. My government brought in accrual accounting. It changeshow these things are read. Accrual accounting has meant modernisation. The change has beendramatic. It is now accrual accounting. I just say to Lawrence: it is accrual accounting, it is accrualaccounting, it is accrual accounting. It is a different system.

Again, the point has been made that capital outlays, as a proportion of total outlays, havedeclined since 1997-98. Even leaving aside the fact that the two figures are not comparable, this view isoversimplistic. The Queensland government has just published a 20-year infrastructure plan that hasbeen applauded by the government’s friends and critics alike. The South East QueenslandInfrastructure Plan and program is a landmark planning document for the future of Queensland. It is amuch more sensible approach to infrastructure planning and investment than Mr Springborg’spercentage of total outlays 1997-98 approach to capital planning.

In 2005-06 the capital program will reach $8 billion—32 per cent higher than last year’s program.It is the highest capital program in real per capita terms in more than a quarter of a century. It is prettygood. This includes playing our part in major energy, rail and ports investment in support of the stateexporters—building the infrastructure for the new Queensland.

In the area of health, I simply provide the comments of an independent voice. The recentlyreleased Australian Hospital Statistics report for 2003-04, released on 27 May, reveals that Queenslandhas the lowest waiting times for elective surgery of all jurisdictions. For example, waiting times were only22 days compared to the national total of 28 days for at least 50 per cent of admitted patients and 115


days compared to the national total of 193 days for 90 per cent of patients admitted. Of the number ofpatients having to wait more than 365 days for treatment, Queensland had the lowest percentage with2.8 per cent compared to a national total of 3.9 per cent. They are not bad figures. They are not perfect,but they are better than the rest of Australia. The low waiting times are despite Queensland having thehighest number of admissions per thousand population at 28.9 per cent compared to the nationalaverage of 26.5 per cent.

The Leader of the Opposition at least attempted to put forward some alternative policy proposalsin the area of health. I want to acknowledge this. In the area of health, of course, it is only proper that weshould await the outcomes and recommendations of the Morris royal commission and the Forsterreview before making decisions, although I have given a clear indication in a major statement in thisHouse about some of the issues that I want considered. Today we have implemented a number ofrecommendations from the interim report of the royal commission.

Just as I put forward some ideas in this place a few weeks ago, the opposition leader is welcometo put forward any suggestions he has. I welcome those. It all adds to the debate, which can only be agood thing. Let us have this debate and fix this once and for all as best we can. I will make thiscommitment today: we will take these suggestions into consideration in framing our policy response.That is, we will consider the Leader of the Opposition’s suggestions on health. I might add that some ofthe suggestions are already government policy or at least we already have very similar policies. Forexample, since 1944 the state government has been offering Queensland students scholarships tostudy medicine if they agree to work in the bush for a designated period. The scheme initially coveredonly medicine, but over the years it has been expanded to fields such as dentistry, pharmacy andnursing. Students who receive scholarships are bonded to Queensland Health for a period of time. Theyare sent to work in regional and rural areas.

On the proposed voucher system under the opposition’s promised charter of patient rights, theopposition leader might wish to note that we are already in partnership with private sector hospitals todeliver elective surgery when it cannot be done in the public system. This is achieved through our$130 million elective surgery blitz. Remember, we promised $110 million in the election campaign, andat the midyear review we promised another $20 million. We announced the $130 million elective surgeryblitz during the last election campaign. Possibly this initiative has slipped the opposition leader’s mind.That sort of thing happens to him.

In respect to dams, my government is already progressing water infrastructure in many parts ofthe state, some of which the National Party has identified in its 10-year plan. It is interesting that theNational Party’s list of dams has barely changed in 10 years. Dams are now being built by thisgovernment, such as in the Burnett, or have been given the green light subject to economic andenvironmental feasibility studies.

Unlike those opposite, my government believes that any future dam should be constructed withina comprehensive planning framework. It is called sustainability. I note that every other government inAustralia, including the federal government, thinks likewise, hence the COAG National Water Initiative.We are hardly out on our own here. We are part of a national system. The process requires us tocomprehensively assess the capacity of each water catchment to determine what is the environmentallyappropriate level of water that may be available for storage and use within that catchment. This involvesdoing the hard yards of preparing comprehensive water resource plans and resource operation plans—things which it is glib and easy to ignore from the opposition benches. However, this ensures that futuredams will be built in the right locations to maximise water storage, capacity and efficiency, and it ensuresthat dams are not built in politically expedient poor locations like many of the dams in Queensland builtby the Nationals that now sit empty year after year at great cost to taxpayers and the environment. Thisis the Nationals’ disgraceful legacy of decades of pork-barrelling.

Finally, I note that yesterday the members opposite again raised the concept of undergroundingpowerlines. They neglected to mention the cost and who would pay for it. Undergrounding is not cheap.Boy, would we love to do that. It costs a bomb. The Department of Energy has advised that the total costof dismantling all the existing overhead powerlines in Queensland and replacing them with undergroundlines is a whopping $57.5 billion. Boy, if we had that money, what would we do with it? Our infrastructureplan, over 20 years, is worth $55 billion. That is what that would cost. That is why we are not rushing intodoing it statewide.

An honourable member interjected. Mr BEATTIE: It would bankrupt us. That is one of the problems. Members of the opposition can

make commitments, but they have to be economically sound and they have to be financiallyresponsible. It is interesting that these days it is the Labor Party that takes on the mantra of beingfinancially responsible. When it comes to economic credentials, that is exactly what the Labor Partystands for—sound economic management and financial responsibility.

Recovery of this cost—that is, the $57.5 billion—on a megawatt per hour base shared withbusiness would increase the electricity charge to the average householder by approximately $890 per

10 Jun 2005 Petition 2131

year in real terms for about the next 25 years. I look forward to Lawrence promising that in the next stateelection campaign in two years time.

The total cost of dismantling the existing medium- and low-voltage overhead powerlines in urbanQueensland alone and replacing them with underground lines would still cost over $6.9 billion, or about$4,135 per customer. Recovery of this cost, again on a megawatt per hour basis shared with business,would increase the electricity charge to the average household by approximately $150 per year in realterms for the next 25 years. So what the opposition stands for is increased electricity prices—verysignificantly increased electricity prices.

I want to restate the claim that this is my government’s best budget yet. I have had the honour ofbeing chairman of the Cabinet Budget Review Committee now for eight budgets. When we came tooffice in 1998 David Hamill, who was Treasurer at the time, brought on a budget at my request at theend of 1998 because we wanted to do some readjusting to overcome a number of problems.Unfortunately, our predecessors had done some borrowing for recurrent expenditure which, as we allknow, is crazy. We do not mind borrowing for capital or infrastructure but not for recurrent expenditure.This is, in fact, the eighth budget for which I have chaired the Cabinet Budget Review Committee.

Terry Mackenroth has been, in my view, probably the best Treasurer that Queensland has everhad. As members know, we are good friends. He is someone that I have worked with. I have enormousregard for him. We do an enormous amount of this work together. It is a great partnership. Thebeneficiaries of that are the people of Queensland.

This budget tackles the issues of today head-on while at the same time setting out a genuine planto secure the state’s future. The opposition would be well served to take a leap out of 1997-98 into 2005-06 and join the rest of Queensland.

On budgetary matters, I want to advise the House that for Queensland Week my department hasproduced a booklet, in conjunction with a range of people, called A great state of mind. It sets out someof the heroes of this state. I table it for the information of the House.

On other financial matters, I did table some documents from the Speaker this morning to assistmembers in their deliberations. I table some reports of previous Speakers and the Leader of theOpposition to give some idea of how they compare.

I have enjoyed working on this budget. As I said, this is our best budget. I can recall our first threeyears when we had to overcome this problem of the borrowings that had been made for recurrentexpenditure and get the state on a sound financial footing. In those first three years our expenditure onkey projects was not as high as we would have liked because we had to get the fundamentals rightagain. We did that. Now we are in a position where we have been able to take the reward for that hardwork. Frankly, we are building, again, the new Queensland.

From time to time I hear Peter Costello talk about the proceeds of the GST. GST is paid byQueenslanders. We get less from the GST reforms per capita than the Australian average. Weabolished a number of taxes to get it. It was designed to be a growth tax so the growth state could befunded. We are just getting our money back. I could not care less what the Labor governments in NewSouth Wales and Victoria have to say about the GST money coming to us. All we get is our fair share.

The other reason I smile when Peter Costello says these things about the GST is that I did a dealwith the Prime Minister at The Lodge one night after the dinner with the premiers and we got our moneyearlier. Yes, we have done very well, and so we should have. I want to put on record my appreciation toJohn Howard. I say to Peter Costello: if you are worried about the money, go and have a chat with Johnand he will explain the deal that we did. That deal has benefited this state. I make no apology forrefusing to sign the GST deal until Queensland got a better deal. We were the last state to sign. ThePrime Minister wanted us to sign; he knew the price to get us to sign and it was a significant price. I haveto say that I am absolutely delighted with that significant price. I want to have it on the permanent recordof this parliament that I am grateful to the Prime Minister for agreeing to the proposition that I put to him.

Motion agreed to.

Reference to Estimates CommitteesMr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Fraser): Order! In accordance with the order of the House on 11 May

2005 the bills are referred to the estimates committees.

PETITIONThe following honourable member has lodged a paper petition for presentation—

Domestic ViolenceMrs Smith from 1,444 petitioners requesting the House to establish a Multi-Disciplinary Domestic Violence Death Review Boardwhich would provide information on the nature and circumstance of each domestic violence death as well as possible gaps inlegislation and/or service response, as with more information these deaths may be prevented.

2132 Adjournment 10 Jun 2005

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENTHon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (4.51 pm): I move—

That the House, at its rising, do adjourn until 9.30 am on Tuesday, 9 August 2005.

Motion agreed to.

ADJOURNMENTHon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (4.51 pm): I move—

That the House do now adjourn.

Water Supply Infrastructure, Dawson RiverMr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (4.51 pm): I want to bring to the

attention of the House again tonight the situation of water supply infrastructure on the Dawson River.The Nathan Gorge dam has been proposed as a solution to a water supply shortage in the Callide andDawson valleys for many years. In fact, since about the 1920s this project has been mooted as a watersupply infrastructure that is badly needed in the area.

In the early years of the term of this government the project certainly found favour with the thenminister, Jim Elder. I had a number of meetings with Mr Elder and I was convinced that he wasproceeding with the project in a way that left me confident that we would see this project become areality. Unfortunately, in recent times the project has dropped off the political radar and there seems tobe no commitment from this government to ensure that the project proceeds. As the member whorepresents that area I understand only too well the impact that the provision of a secure water supply tothe Callide and Dawson valleys would have on the communities of that area, particularly Biloela wherethere is a very great potential for industrial development in conjunction with the Callide Power Stationand with the coal reserves that exist in that area. The essential element that is missing is a secure watersupply.

I take this opportunity to remind the government that the Nathan Gorge dam should still be apriority, and I urge it to take the same approach that was taken by the minister for state development inthe first term of the Beattie Labor government and make this project a priority for the sake of all ofQueensland but for that area of central Queensland in particular.

I am aware that there was an action taken in the Federal Court by a number of conservationgroups which has delayed the progress of this project but, from my understanding of the currentsituation, I think the whole project could be advanced in a very real way by a positive attitude by thestate government. It is up to the state government to drive this issue. What is lacking at the moment isfor somebody to take an interest in this issue and drive the issue forward—to overcome the obstaclesthat are being put in place. I think it has become convenient to let this limbo situation go on.

For the sake of the areas that I represent, I call on the government tonight to ensure that thisproject proceeds. For the future of the Biloela community in particular and for the potential for industrialdevelopment and irrigated agricultural development in those areas to be realised, this project needs tohappen.

Blackwater HospitalMr PEARCE (Fitzroy—ALP) (4.54 pm): Today we saw in this place our Premier and the Minister

for Health, with the support of the parliament, immediately amend legislation in response to the interimreport of Commissioner Anthony Morris into the Bundaberg Hospital. I congratulate all those associatedwith the interim report and the swift response to that report.

On behalf of the people of Blackwater and the surrounding district, I wish to raise their concern atthe lack of a suitably skilled doctor to service the town’s rural hospital. On 13 May Blackwater Hospitalsuperintendent Mark Brown, who also holds a right to private practice, was forced to take sick leave withonly two days notice. Because of the doctor shortage within the system we have not been able to find areplacement to cover Dr Brown’s absence. This has caused much anguish for the local people. Like allcommunities where a hospital exists, they rely on the hospital for emergency care.

Located on the Capricorn Highway, two hours west of Rockhampton, the town of Blackwatersupports a community of more than 7,000. It is home to a huge coal industry work force, has threeschools, is surrounded by a busy rural industry and is within reach of several small communities. Thecoal industry is a high-risk, 24/7 heavy industry where a workplace incident can cause serious injury andloss of life. Blackwater residents therefore expect their hospital to have 24/7 coverage. That is why thereis so much concern about the inability of the system to secure a locum to cover Dr Brown’s absence.

The people, the mining unions and mine management are asking why the situation has beenallowed to develop. I wish to assure the people I represent that, to the best of my knowledge, everything

10 Jun 2005 Adjournment 2133

possible has been done to find a relief doctor for Dr Brown. Dr Louise Russell, who lives in the Rollston/Springsure area, committed herself to two and three days a week to help out but could not, due to familyand isolation, commit herself to 24/7 coverage at the hospital. All 37 health districts were contacted byemail requesting assistance with the situation at Blackwater. All known current and previous locums,semiretired doctors and GPs in the area were contacted to see if any assistance could be engaged. Allknown locum agencies, 15 in all in Queensland, were contacted, as was the RFDS. No relief doctorcould be identified. No stone was left unturned in the search for a doctor.

Today I wish to advise the House that I will be writing to Peter Forster, head of the Queenslandhealth system review, to draw his attention to what has happened in Blackwater. I want the people Irepresent to hear from an independent person the reasons there are not enough doctors in QueenslandHealth and what can be done to fix the problem. Was the process used in the search for a locumeffective in that it considered every possible option and gave consideration to sharing of the riskbetween those facilities where there are doctors to that of Blackwater with no doctor and a workplaceenvironment of extremely high risk? I want to know what more I could have done to secure a doctor forthe hospital.

In closing, I thank the dedicated and highly skilled staff of Blackwater Hospital for theircommitment to the task. I also thank Dr Louise Russell, who has given up family time and travelled longdistances to provide what hours she can. Her time is sincerely appreciated. Thanks also to Pat Castle,acting manager, central highlands health district, for his outstanding effort in trying to find a doctor.Finally, thanks to the people of Blackwater for their understanding and cooperation.

Time expired.

Sunshine CoastMr McARDLE (Caloundra—Lib) (4.58 pm): Sometimes in this House I think we tend to forget

that, though we are seeking goods and services for our areas, we live in a very lucky country such asAustralia. I also think that on occasions we tend to forget that we live in the wonderful regions fromwhich we come. In this House there are many people who have seats on the Sunshine Coast. I think thefact that we do have such diversity of seats points to the diversity of the population and the diversity ofthe interests in the Sunshine Coast area itself.

However, wherever people live on the coast they quickly come to understand what a wonderfulregion it is. When we consider the Blackall Range and the towns of Mapleton, Montville, Maleny,Cooroy, Tewantin and others, Nambour, Beerwah, Landsborough and areas such as Caloundra,Kawana, Maroochy, Noosa and other areas across the whole spectrum, we start to get an idea as towhy people are moving there in their thousands. Irrespective of which party they come from, I believethat all members of this House who do hold seats on the coast have a deep and abiding affection for thearea.

In my opinion, one of the reasons the coast is such a special place to live is the community spiritthat is generated by the people who live there. When I attend public functions or events there is alwayssomebody there with a ready smile and an offer of a cup of tea or coffee and ready to have a chinwagabout what is going on in their lives. It is that sort of camaraderie that distinguishes the Sunshine Coastand makes it a region of major significance and beauty. As people travel around the Sunshine Coastthey feel the same warmth no matter who they are and where they come from. It is the social capital of aregion that provides the catalyst for change and, at the same time, acceptance of things that aredifferent.

The Sunshine Coast region has been changing for many years. There has been a populationexplosion. Interests are changing across the Sunshine Coast. Change is essential if the region is goingto continue to grow. Change brings with it new ideas and new concepts. That expands the vision of thepeople who reside there.

As we continue to face hurdles over the next 20 to 30 years I am quite convinced that the peopleof the Sunshine Coast will find the answers to many of the issues that they face on a daily basis. Weneed to work as a region. We need to establish ourselves as a regional force with our own capacity andour own resources and our own future. There does come a time when a community has to pull togetheras one body, in unison to achieve a final goal. What the goal or goals may be may be some time in thereckoning. However, once we start down that process I can assure this House and all members that theSunshine Coast will become a region of significant force.

Time expired.

Moreton Bay Region Export AwardsHon. KW HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) (5.01 pm): Recently I had the honour of representing the

Premier at the launch of the Premier of Queensland’s Moreton Bay Region Export Awards. The launchof these awards was held in Narangba in the electorate of Kallangur. The government’s drive to boostexports is right on track with a diverse range of Moreton Bay companies starting to export for the first


time. The categories of these awards are: agribusiness, arts and entertainment, information andcommunications technology, education, large manufacturer, small to medium manufacturer, andemerging exporter. Overall winners will be announced for emerging exporter and regional exporter ofthe year.

The awards provide an opportunity to promote a business and to showcase that business’sachievements and recognise the region from which the business comes. For the first time Queenslandcompanies will be able to apply online and judges will be able to pre-judge applications online.Queensland is the first state to implement an internet based application system and is leading the wayfor the rest of Australia. It has been made as simple as possible to apply for an award. I take theopportunity here tonight—and I no doubt reflect the opinion of all members of parliament—to urge allexporters to visit www.exportawards.qld.gov.au and find the information they need.

We are achieving export growth through our reputation for innovative exports and hard work. Thisis what these awards are about. That hard work has been undertaken by the Queensland governmentand Austrade. To build on our export markets the Queensland government is encouraging innovationand value adding to our traditional industries such as mining and agriculture where we really are worldleaders. Our leading exporters increasingly epitomise the Smart State, excelling in the provision ofservices and expertise in many diverse fields.

To date, close to 500 new exporters have been added to the ranks of Queensland companiestrading in overseas markets. Congratulations to every one of them. In the Moreton Bay region exportersare doing a fantastic job. Entries close on Wednesday, 27 July. Winners for the Moreton Bay region willbe announced at a dinner function on Saturday, 10 September. An application for these awards is alsoapplicable to the prestigious Premier of Queensland’s 2005 export awards to be held in Brisbane on 27October. Winners of the Queensland export awards are automatic finalists in the Australian exportawards being held in Sydney in December.

Burnett Heads State School; School BusesMr MESSENGER (Burnett—NPA) (5.04 pm): I am pleased to see that the education minister is in

the House tonight because I have a problem that I hope she can help me with. During the summermonths children at the Burnett Heads State School are being eaten by mosquitoes. I think she mayalready be aware of this.

The Burnett Shire Council is doing its fair share to control or eradicate these mozzies. A range ofproblems are facing them. First and foremost is the amount of water that naturally lays around BurnettHeads after it rains. The council has spent quite a deal of money upgrading the drains and helping outwith the spraying programs.

After a bit of rain quite a lot of mozzies hang around the Burnett Heads school grounds. Aspraying program is needed. I think each spraying program costs around $300. That comes out of theschool budget, which is quite difficult. The Burnett Shire Council has recently been helping out with thecost of that eradication program.

One of the most effective ways of stopping the kids being eaten alive is to aircondition the schooland have mozzie proof classrooms. I believe something has to be done before summer is upon usagain. I know that the P&C is working like heck to find a solution. I implore the education minister tomake sure her department does its fair share to eradicate these mozzies.

I know that a number of children last year got quite sick because of the number of mozzie bites.The number of mosquitoes in the school ground has to be seen to be believed. They are virtually carriedaway. There were a number of media reports about the mosquito problem. It is a problem that we wouldlike fixed.

Another problem we should deal with is the age of the school bus. I pose the question to thisHouse: will we still have the oldest school buses in Australia? If we do not allocate significantly morefunds to the provision of school buses I predict that we are heading for disaster—and I do not likepredicting that. No further funds have been allocated in the budget for the provision of school buses.The only funding is the already announced $12 million over four years. That is not going to be enough.

Currently the government funds approximately 40 vehicles per year. With the additional$12 million over four years this will increase to 80 vehicles per year. To fix the problem we need aminimum of 100 buses per year, preferably 300 buses per year, provided over the next five years.Basically we require another $1.5 million in funding.

Trinity Lutheran CollegeMr LAWLOR (Southport—ALP) (5.07 pm): Two weeks ago I had the pleasure of representing the

Minister for Education and the Arts, Anna Bligh, at the official opening and dedication of the TrinityLutheran College middle school. In attendance were: the chairman of the college council, JohnStapleton; the head of the college, Mrs Anne Mitchell; Pastor Wayne Zweck, the secretary of the church


and director of mission and ministry of the Lutheran Church of Australia; the head of the middle school,Mrs Carrie Allwood; and pastor for the middle and senior school, Micke Nelder.

The establishment of Trinity Lutheran College’s unique middle school system is a landmark eventfor the school and one that will guarantee the necessary smooth transition for students moving fromprimary to senior education. The new facilities are a total school suite of buildings for a fully self-contained middle school for students in years 6 to 9 for a maximum of 500 students and associatedstaff, both teaching and administration, and appropriate resource staff. By providing this longer andmore efficient transition period for students entering their final years of schooling, Trinity LutheranCollege is better preparing its students for the often more daunting and challenging demands of senioreducation.

I am extremely proud of the state government’s contribution towards the valuable additions toTrinity’s education system. Over $303 million in recurrent state funding has been shared amongstQueensland’s non-state schools for the 2004-05 financial year. Trinity Lutheran College received$1.857 million in state government grant funding in 2004 and to date $485,610 for 2005.

Much of this financial support has contributed towards the construction and road work for Trinity’snew middle school. These funds, in addition to approximately $62.8 million shared amongst non-stateschools in 2004-05, are part of the state government’s continued support for schools within myelectorate as well as all over Queensland.

Trinity Lutheran Primary School opened its doors in 1981 as a result of the efforts of a small groupof visionaries. The school began with 75 students with the first classes in the Southport church hall. Thefirst building was on the Cotlew Street campus and consisted of four classrooms and an office. Thesecondary school on the Ashmore Road campus opened its doors in 1987. In the late 1990s the middleschool planning commenced. I congratulate all involved in the middle school from its inception to itsimplementation.

Gladstone Show Society, ClosureMrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (5.09 pm): I was disappointed to learn that this week

Gladstone’s mayor has called for the Gladstone Show to close its doors. I acknowledge that showsacross Queensland face challenges today. However, from the response by Noel Reddacliff, chairman ofthe Show Society, to the mayor’s call, no contact had been made by the mayor on a private basis withthe Show Society to discuss his concerns. Noel’s response was typically Noel. He stated—The show will continue as long as people support them.

That is a great attitude. Robyn and Noel have been involved in the Show Society for many years.They, along with past and present committees, work tirelessly to organise the show for exhibitors,competitors and visitors alike. The show has to compete with the Harbour Festival, which is alsoexcellently run, held over the Easter weekend and which operates without entry cost but has a sideshowalley as well as a wide range of free entertainment. This takes its toll on the show. However, I supportthe Show Society and the great band of volunteers who work so hard for the institution that is theGladstone Show.

It is a fact that Gladstone’s show holiday is today and the activities of the show are in full swing aswe speak. These include the wood chopping, show jumping and all of the centre ring activities that wehave all enjoyed for many years, as well as displays and other exhibitions. The other show in myelectorate is the Mount Larcom Show, which will be held later this month, which is a more traditionalagricultural show. Both, however, succeed because people like Robyn and Noel Reddacliff and theircommittee members are prepared to invest a great deal of time and energy into planning for the benefitof the community. May the Gladstone Show continue, as Noel said, for as long as people will support it.My heartiest congratulations to all involved in both the Gladstone Show and the Mount Larcom Show.

State Education Week, MackayMr MULHERIN (Mackay—ALP) (5.11 pm): State Education Week in Mackay saw students,

teachers and parents come together through a variety of activities which celebrated learning. Activitiesranged from morning tea, sports days and arts programs to debating competitions and visits from paststudents of many of the schools. A highlight of the week-long activities was the Showcase Awards forExcellence in Schools night, which was an ideal opportunity for schools in the Mackay region to sharetheir achievements and recognise individuals who have contributed to excellence in state educationthrough innovative and effective learning programs. I was privileged to attend this occasion andcommend Pioneer State High School, the Mirani cluster, Fitzgerald State School, Slade Point StateSchool and Moranbah East State School for receiving regional awards. Mackay has a history of doingwell in the state finals of the showcase awards, and I wish these schools much success this year.

I also had the opportunity to present Fitzgerald State School teacher Chris Neven with his MyFavourite Teacher Award certificate. The My Favourite Teacher Award program is an excellent newinitiative by the state government for recognising the commitment of teachers across the state.


Mr Neven is a young teacher who was quite humble in accepting his award. When asked what it wasthat made teaching special, Mr Neven said that it was the relationships formed with parents andstudents in creating a sense of community that inspired him.

I also commend Mackay State High School for its outstanding efforts in coordinating a week full ofinteresting activities and the production of a brochure entitled Creative Generation, which outlinedevents and provided a registration form for the activities listed. The brochure was part of an advertisingcampaign supported by small ads appearing in the Daily Mercury newspaper to encourage attendance.I am proud to say that all schools in the Mackay region displayed a genuine effort in raising theawareness of State Education Week 2005. I offer special thanks to Mackay Education QueenslandManager of District Services, Grant Webb, and community participation officer Cillia Martland for theircontributions to the program.

Population Growth, Beaudesert AreaHon. KR LINGARD (Beaudesert—NPA) (5.14 pm): The population growth around Beaudesert,

Canungra and Boonah has been quite amazing. Similarly, the real estate values in those areas havegrown quite amazingly as well. One of the areas that really has grown is Kooralbyn. Some 18 monthsago there were many homes at Kooralbyn for sale, but now there are probably only two houses atKooralbyn on the market. The people of Kooralbyn, regardless of who they are, have allowed a$2 million development of the Kooralbyn Golf Course with a proposal to put 600 homes around that golfcourse. Quite obviously we all hope that this project at Kooralbyn goes extremely well. The only difficultyis that that sort of growth leads to a great population increase and the resultant need for police stationsand the upgrade of police stations.

One thing about Beaudesert is that, whilst it has a good police station, it does not have suitablefacilities for a 24-hour police station. I remind the government that in 1997-98 the proposed capitalworks program of the police department allowed for a new police station to be provided at Beaudesert in2005 regardless of the new station that was provided at Jimboomba. With this massive real estategrowth in the Beaudesert and Kooralbyn areas and the resultant population growth in those areas, quiteobviously the proposal to build a new police station in 2005 is one that still must be adhered to.

The other issue I want to comment on relates to the Premier’s comments once again about damsand water in south-east Queensland. If the ALP is to continue with the idea of farmers and people whobenefit from a dam paying for capital infrastructure growth and if it is to continue with the statementsmade by the Premier here today that some dams in the south-east corner are inefficient, it will neverbuild any dams. In the 1930s and 1940s Maroon and Moogerah were seen as more desirable thanGlendower and Wyaralong, which the government is now putting its faith in. If it continues the practice ofallowing water from dams such as Moogerah to be taken to areas such as Swanbank when it gets to10 per cent or 11 per cent full, then it is continuing to decrease the amount of water in those dams.

I remind members of the government that people who depend on irrigation have not had anywater from the Moogerah for two or three years. Why? Because areas like Swanbank are allowed totake four per cent or five per cent—once that dam gets to 10 per cent or 11 per cent—of the water andstore it at Swanbank. That water is then used for the power at Swanbank, because Swanbank is apriority. I remind all government members that those dams were built for agricultural viability. For two orthree years those dams have never supplied any water to irrigators because areas like Swanbank,Ipswich and Boonah have top priority. Once that dam gets to 11 per cent, those areas immediately takefour per cent or five per cent off so that the costs can be paid to SunWater.

Bundaberg Base HospitalHon. NI CUNNINGHAM (Bundaberg—ALP) (5.17 pm): Earlier this afternoon I spoke to the health

bill and mentioned that Bundaberg residents do not want any more negativity, name-calling or politicalgames in relation to our hospital. They just want the patients looked after and the problems fixed. Togive this House an indication of the feeling of our residents, I would like to place on record the wordsprinted in a recent Neighbourhood Watch newsletter in Bundaberg. The newsletter states—We have seen plenty of bad news about the Bundaberg Base Hospital in the Newspapers and on the television recently, but wehaven’t seen any good news about the hospital. The people that still work at the hospital each and every day and night lookingafter the care of our children, parents, family and friends seems to have been forgotten. The volunteers that visit the sick andlonely just to have a little chat to make them feel better, the volunteers that fix the flowers each day on the wards, the volunteersthat man the Blood Bank desk, the volunteers that take books around the wards for people to read, the volunteers that read to thechildren, the volunteers that courier within the hospital five days a week, 4 to 6 hours a day on their feet. These people, along withthe paid staff who work long hours and provide a huge number of services that help the community every day deserve to be toldthat we have faith in them, let your local member know or write to the newspaper and let them and others know that we still carewhat happens to our hospital and its staff.

This is how our residents feel. They want the patients looked after and they want the problemsresolved, but they are angry at the unnecessary constant interference for political gain that they arereading day in and day out. It does nothing but denigrate our hospital even further.


Youth PartiesMrs ATTWOOD (Mount Ommaney—ALP) (5.18 pm): On 24 May the Minister for Police and

Corrective Services, the Hon. Judy Spence MP, announced the establishment of a review committee tolook at youth parties and gatherings in public spaces that get out of control. I have been pleased with thepublic interest shown to date in the formation of this task force. There are many people across the statewho have been affected by youth parties and gatherings in public spaces that have spiralled out ofcontrol.

The task force will not only examine the level and extent of this problem in Queensland but also,and most importantly, provide recommendations on how the government can address this issue.

Today the minister announced the opening of public submissions for the safe youth parties taskforce. An important part of the committee’s research will be to hear from Queenslanders about theirviews on youth parties. The task force will seek feedback from young people, parents and neighbourswho have been involved in or who have been affected by youth parties that have become disruptive. Weare also interested in hearing from people who have successfully hosted youth parties or have ideas tooffer on how to manage youth parties successfully. The task force will also seek feedback fromorganisations and bodies that represent young people and touch base with other jurisdictions.

This is the opportunity for Queenslanders to have their say on this issue and help come up withworkable and safe solutions for youth parties and gatherings. This is not about finding ways to stopthese types of gatherings or trying to take the fun out of parties. It is about finding a workable and safesolution to what are regular rites of passage for young people.

A discussion paper has been prepared by the task force to assist people in providing relevant anduseful information and ideas. I table a copy of that discussion paper with contact details for thosewishing to make submissions. I encourage people to take the opportunity to make a submission beforethe 12 August deadline. I know that the committee looks forward to seeing what young people have tosay. I look forward to reporting on further milestones as this committee progresses.

Motion agreed to. The House adjourned at 5.21 pm.

GOVERNMENT PRINTER, QUEENSLAND—2005

2005 06 10 weekly - parliament.qld.gov.au · be suspended during this time and resume after 4.30...

Documents