Senate debates
Monday, 14 August 2006
Notices
Presentation
Senator Siewert to move on the next day of sitting:
- That the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee be authorised to hold a public meeting during the sitting of the Senate on Wednesday, 16 August 2006, from 4.30 pm, to take evidence for the committee’s inquiry into water policy initiatives.
Senators Chris Evans, Bartlett and Siewert to move on the next day of sitting:
- That the Senate—
- (a)
- notes that the National Indigenous art awards ceremony was held in Darwin on 11 August 2006; and
- (b)
- congratulates all winners and particularly Ngoia Napaltjarri Pollard for her work ‘Swamps West of Nyirripi’ which won the main prize.
Senator Bartlett to move on the next day of sitting:
- That the time for the presentation of the report of the Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts References Committee on women in sport and recreation in Australia be extended to 6 September 2006.
Senator Allison to move on the next day of sitting:
- That the Senate—
- (a)
- notes the consensus statement released on 14 August 2006 on draft ‘Medicare Item 16400: Antenatal care in rural and remote communities’, which reflects the concerns of the Australian Nursing Federation, the Council of Remote Area Nurses of Australia, the Australian College of Midwives, the Association of Australian Rural Nurses, the Australian Practice Nurses Association, the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Council, the College of Nursing and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists;
- (b)
- acknowledges that the statement expresses concerns about the safety and quality of care that would be provided under the proposed new item within the current descriptor and explanatory notes, specifically:
- (i)
- that safe and high quality antenatal care can only be provided by a qualified health professional with appropriate education, that is, a qualified midwife, a nurse with midwifery qualifications, an obstetrician or a general practitioner with a diploma in obstetrics or equivalent qualifications, and
- (ii)
- that the signatories to the statement do not support the inclusion of nurses without midwifery qualifications on the list of eligible care providers for the item number 16400 descriptor and explanatory notes; and
- (c)
- calls on the Government to modify the item so that only adequately qualified professionals are able to provide antenatal care.
Senator Bartlett to move on the next day of sitting:
- That the Senate—
- (a)
- notes that:
- (i)
- alarming rates of deforestation are occurring in south east Asia and the Pacific region through illegal and unsustainable logging practices,
- (ii)
- unsustainable management of natural resources will have long-term negative economic, environmental and social consequences for countries in which illegal logging is occurring,
- (iii)
- illegal trade of forest timber contributes to corruption, money laundering, organised crime and human rights abuses, and threatens the viability of responsible companies that want to invest in sustainable practices,
- (iv)
- there is a widespread presence of suspected illegal timber from Papua New Guinea and Indonesia in Australia,
- (v)
- the Government had committed to addressing the problem prior to the 2004 Election and has since reaffirmed this commitment, and
- (vi)
- voluntary approaches to dealing with illegal timber and wood product imports will be neither fast enough nor effective enough; and
- (b)
- calls on the Government to:
- (i)
- immediately legislate to stop the importation of illegal timber and wood products into Australia, and
- (ii)
- phase in over 2 years a requirement for only timber and wood products from credibly certified sources to be imported.
Senator Allison to move on the next day of sitting:
- That the Senate—
- (a)
- notes:
- (i)
- the launch on 1 August 2006 of the Clinton Climate Initiative, dedicated to fighting climate change in practical and measurable ways,
- (ii)
- that President Bill Clinton was joined by London Mayor Ken Livingstone, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom to announce the first project of the initiative, and
- (iii)
- that urban areas are responsible for over 75 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions in the world;
- (b)
- notes that the initiative will:
- (i)
- create a purchasing consortium that will pool the purchasing power of the cities to lower the prices of energy saving products and accelerate the development and deployment of new energy saving and greenhouse gas reducing technologies and products,
- (ii)
- mobilise the best experts in the world to provide technical assistance to cities to develop and implement plans that will result in greater energy efficiency and lower greenhouse gas emissions, and
- (iii)
- create and deploy common measurement tools and Internet-based communications systems that will allow cities to establish a baseline on their greenhouse gas emissions, measure the effectiveness of the program in reducing these emissions and to share what works and what does not work with each other; and
- (c)
- commends this scheme and urges the Federal Government and state governments to assist local government in Australia’s capital cities to join the initiative and introduce:
- (i)
- more energy efficient lighting for traffic and street lights,
- (ii)
- building codes and practices that make use of more effective insulation, more energy efficient windows, more energy efficient heating and ventilation systems and more energy efficient lighting,
- (iii)
- more energy efficient municipal water and sanitation systems,
- (iv)
- localised, cleaner electric generation system,
- (v)
- biofuels or hybrid technologies for city buses, garbage trucks and other vehicles,
- (vi)
- schemes to reduce traffic congestion,
- (vii)
- use the biomass from city garbage dumps to generate electricity, and
- (viii)
- more intelligent design of electric grids both across the city and within office and municipal buildings.
Senator Allison to move on the next day of sitting:
- That the Senate—
- (a)
- notes the evaluation, released in July 2006, of the South Australian Sexual Health and Relationships Education (Share) project 2003-2005 which:
- (i)
- recognised the Share program as current best practice in sex education, moving from a model of sex education focussing on the human reproductive system to a broader sexual health promotion encompassing sexual development, reproductive health, interpersonal relationships, affection, intimacy, body image and gender roles,
- (ii)
- found it essential that sexual health and relationships education acknowledges young people as diverse and sexual beings, provides an appropriate and comprehensive curriculum context, is positive about sexuality, moves beyond information provision, addresses issues of gender and the social and cultural world in which young people make decisions and refrain from teaching abstinence alone, and
- (iii)
- placed a high priority on supporting the professional development and training of teachers with well-resourced, sympathetic experts to support, guide and advise; and
- (b)
- calls on the Government to take to the next meeting of education ministers a proposal to develop a national framework of comprehensive, evidence-based sex education for students in all Australian schools.
Senator Kemp to move on the next day of sitting:
- That the following matter be referred to the Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by the first sitting day in 2007:
Australia’s Indigenous visual arts and craft sector, with particular reference to:
- (a)
- the current size and scale of Australia’s Indigenous visual arts and craft sector;
- (b)
- the economic, social and cultural benefits of the sector;
- (c)
- the overall financial, cultural and artistic sustainability of the sector;
- (d)
- the current and likely future priority infrastructure needs of the sector;
- (e)
- opportunities for strategies and mechanisms that the sector could adopt to improve its practices, capacity and sustainability, including to deal with unscrupulous or unethical conduct;
- (f)
- opportunities for existing government support programs for Indigenous visual arts and crafts to be more effectively targeted to improve the sector’s capacity and future sustainability; and
- (g)
- future opportunities for further growth of Australia’s Indigenous visual arts and craft sector, including through further developing international markets.
Senator Abetz to move on Wednesday, 16 August 2006:
- That the Senate—
- (a)
- dissociates itself from the notice of motion given on 9 May 2006 by the Leader of the Australian Greens (Senator Bob Brown) relating to the Exclusive Brethren;
- (b)
- regrets the ongoing deferral of the motion by Senator Bob Brown;
- (c)
- condemns the use of parliamentary processes to vilify lawful religious minorities; and
- (d)
- calls on Senator Bob Brown to withdraw his motion immediately.
3:38 pm
John Watson (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Following the receipt of satisfactory responses, on behalf of the Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances, I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall withdraw 11 notices of disallowance, the full terms of which have been circulated in the chamber and which I now hand to the Clerk.
The list read as follows—
Eight sitting days after today—
Business of the Senate─Notices of Motion Nos.
- (1)
- Aviation Transport Security Amendment Regulations 2006 (No. 1), as contained in Select Legislative Instrument 2006 No. 40 and made under the Aviation Transport Support Act 2004.
- (4)
- Occupational Health and Safety (Commonwealth Employment) (National Standards) Amendment Regulations 2006 (No. 2), as contained in Select Legislative Instrument 2006 No. 9 and made under the Occupational Health and Safety (Commonwealth Employment) Act 1991.
Eleven sitting days after today—
Business of the Senate─Notices of Motion Nos.
- (1)
- Banking (Prudential Standard) Determination No. 1 of 2006 made under paragraphs 11AF(1)(a) and (b) of the Banking Act 1959.
- (3)
- Determination of Patient Contribution HIB 07/2006 made under subsection 3(1) of the Health Insurance Act 1973.
- (4)
- Determination of Patient Contribution HIB 08/2006 made under subsection 3(1) of the Health Insurance Act 1973.
- (5)
- Determination of Patient Contribution HIB 09/2006 made under subsection 3(1) of the Health Insurance Act 1973.
- (6)
- Determination of Patient Contribution HIB 10/2006 made under subsection 3(1) of the Health Insurance Act 1973.
- (7)
- Determination of Patient Contribution HIB 11/2006 made under subsection 3(1) of the Health Insurance Act 1973.
- (8)
- Determination of Patient Contribution HIB 12/2006 made under subsection 3(1) of the Health Insurance Act 1973.
- (9)
- Insurance (Prudential Standard) Determination No. 4 of 2006 made under subsection 32(1) of the Insurance Act 1973.
- (10)
- Life Insurance (Prudential Standard) Determination No. 1 of 2006 made under paragraph 230A(1)(a) of the Life Insurance Act 1995.
I seek leave to incorporate in Hansard the committee’s correspondence concerning these instruments.
Leave granted.
The correspondence read as follows—
Aviation Transport Security Amendment Regulations 2006 (No. 1), Select Legislative Instrument 2006 No. 40
30 March 2006
The Hon Warren Truss MP
Minister for Transport and Regional Services
Suite MG.46
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Dear Minister
I refer to the Aviation Transport Security Amendment Regulations 2006 (No. 1), Select Legislative Instrument 2006 No. 40. These Regulations amend regulation 9.01 of the principal Regulations, concerning the making of threats regarding aviation security. The Committee raises the following matters with regard to these Regulations.
According to the Explanatory Statement that accompanies this instrument, the purpose of this amendment is to change the culture of persons who travel by air and/or frequent airports. This appears to include changing the behaviour of people regarding the making of jokes about bombs in luggage. Given the significance of this purpose, the Committee would appreciate your advice on whether this strict liability offence should be included in the body of the Act itself instead of in Regulations. The Committee would also appreciate advice about the steps that will be taken to bring this new offence to the attention of persons who travel by air and/or frequent airports.
Secondly, section 17 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 directs a rule-maker to be satisfied that appropriate consultation, as is reasonably practicable, has been undertaken particularly where a proposed instrument is likely to have an effect on business. Section 18 of the Act provides that in some circumstances consultation may be unnecessary or inappropriate. The definition of ‘explanatory statement’ in section 4 of the Act requires an explanatory statement to describe the nature of any consultation that has been carried out or, if there has been no consultation, to explain why none was undertaken. The Explanatory Statement that accompanies this Determination makes no reference to consultation. The Committee therefore seeks your advice on whether consultation was undertaken and, if so, the nature of that consultation.
The Committee also seeks an assurance that future explanatory statements will provide information on consultation as required by the Legislative Instruments Act.
The Committee would appreciate your advice on the above matters as soon as possible, but before 5 May 2006, to enable it to finalise its consideration of these Regulations. Correspondence should be directed to the Chairman, Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances, Room SG49, Parliament House, Canberra.
Yours sincerely
Chairman
5 May 2006
Senator John Watson
Chairman
Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances
Room SG49
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Dear Senator Watson
Thank you for your letter of 30 March 2006 regarding the Aviation Transport Security Amendment Regulations 2006 (No. l ). These Regulations amend Regulation 9.01 of the principal Regulations, concerning the making of threats regarding aviation security. The Committee has raised some important matters and I am pleased to be able to address them.
The Committee has sought my advice on whether this offence should be included in the body of the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 (the Act) itself instead of in the Regulations. The Regulation amends an existing offence which was included in the Regulations at the time they were first made, last year. My Department followed the model of the existing offence for this exercise. Also there are other offences established in the principal Regulations so as we were building on an existing model within an existing regime my Department did not see that it is essential that the Act be amended.
The amendment to Regulation 9.01 was brought to the attention of airport operators and the travelling public initially, when the Prime Minister, the Hon John Howard MP announced a range of improvements to aviation security in September 2005. A subsequent media statement was also released jointly by Senator the Hon Chris Ellison, Minister for Justice and Customs and myself on the 27 February 2006 announcing the commencement of Regulation 9.01 and the penalties associated with the offence. My Department also wrote to industry leaders outlining the legal impact of the changes to the aviation security framework, as well as highlighting the development and then introduction of the offence in earlier industry meetings.
My Department did not give specific guidance to operators as to how the travelling public should be informed of the new security arrangements but I understand airport operators have a range of publication strategies, including announcements over public address systems and signage, when the existing offence only referred to not making jokes about security. We expect that operators would build on the publication strategies for the existing offence.’
As noted by the Committee the Explanatory Statement that accompanies the amendment makes no reference to consultation. I am aware that consultation is a requirement of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 and that consultation did take place in various aviation industry forums about this amendment. My Department has assured me that in future it will provide information on consultation in explanatory statements as required.
Thank you for bringing your concerns to my attention and I trust this information is of assistance.
Yours sincerely
Warren Truss
Minister for Transport and Regional Services
15 June 2006
The Hon Warren Truss MP
Minister for Transport and Regional Services
Suite MG.46
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Dear Minister
Thank you for your letter of 5 May 2006 responding to the Committee’s concerns with the Aviation Transport Security Amendment Regulations 2006 (No. 1), Select Legislative Instrument 2006 No. 40. Your advice has answered most of the Committee’s concerns.
In your response you advise that consultation on the amendment contained in these Regulations did take place in various aviation industry forums. The Committee would appreciate further information on this consultation. In particular which industry forums were involved and what was the outcome of discussions with these bodies.
As a precautionary measure, and in order to allow time for further discussion on this matter, the Committee has agreed to give a notice of motion to disallow these Regulations on Monday 19 June 2006.
The Committee would appreciate your advice on the above matter as soon as possible, but before 14 July 2006, to enable it to finalise its consideration of these Regulations. Correspondence should be directed to the Chairman, Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances, Room SG49, Parliament House, Canberra.
Yours sincerely
John Watson
Chairman
11 July 2006
Senator John Watson
Chairman
Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances
Room SG 49
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Dear Senator Watson
Thank you for your letter of 15 June 2006 regarding my correspondence to you on the Aviation Transport Security Amendment Regulations 2006 (No 1). You asked for further information on which industry forums were involved and what was discussed in consultations leading up to making the regulation.
There are two principal aviation industry forums that my Department deals with, and they are the Aviation Security Advisory Forum (ASAF) and the Regional Industry Consultative Meeting (RICM). ASAF is focussed on major aviation business entities who are now security regulated under the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004. I have attached an attendance list of persons who attended a forum held on 28 June 2006 as an indication of the level of the forum and the level of representation. There are four or five meetings of this forum in any calendar year. RICM focuses on smaller aviation business entities, for example regional airports. The aviation industry is not homogenous so it is best to split consultation roughly on business size; a small regional airport has different security issues to those facing Qantas.
Managing security at airports has changed dramatically following the events of September 11 and it is now widely appreciated that unattended baggage may be a security threat (previously theft was the principal concern). Amongst a range of enhanced security measures that Cabinet agreed last September was the proposal that the Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2004 (the Regulations) be amended to ensure an offence existed which covered leaving baggage unattended in airports. Although this was a submission brought forward by the Attorney-General’s Department my Department was consulted, and agreed in principle with the recommendation. Departmental officers understood that leaving baggage unattended in airports represented a security concern.
When ASAF and RICM were advised that Cabinet had decided that a relevant offence should be written they were already of the view that leaving baggage unattended at airports needed to be better managed. So industry concerns had also contributed to the recommendation that the Regulations be amended to write a relevant offence. Thus while ASAF and RICM were advised this was to note the Cabinet’s decision; in turn that had partly sprung from industry security concerns. Industry’s concerns were that the new arrangements be clear and my Department obtained legal advice on the best way to set out the new offence. This involved building on an existing offence at Regulation 9.01 of the Regulations.
Thank you for raising this matter.
Yours sincerely
Warren Truss
Minister for Transport and Regional Services
Enc
ASAF
Attendees and Apologies for Melbourne 27 & 28 June 06
Updated: 20 June 2006
Name | Surname | Position | Organisation | Dine 27-6 | Meet 28-6 |
Geoff | Askew | Head of Group Security | Qantas | X | X |
Chris | Barlow | X | X | ||
Gary | Bowden | National Security Operations Manager | X | X | |
Warwick | Bull | State Security Manager | OTS, DOTARS | X | X |
Matthew | Cocker | Security Manager | Northern Territory Airports Pty Ltd | X | X |
Darren | Combie | General Manager, Aviation Security Operations Branch | OTS, DOTARS | X | X |
Gabrielle | Crick | A/g Section Head Wheeler Policy Implementation Section | OTS, DOTARS | X | X |
Mandy | Davis | Airport Manager, AQIS Victoria | Australian Quarantine Inspection Service | X | |
John | Diggins | General Manager Development, Operations & Maintenance | Northern Territory Airports Pty Ltd | X | X |
Jan | Dorrington | A/g National Director Border Intelligence and Passengers | |||
Richard | Doyle | Manager, Airport Operations | NO | X | |
Bob | Fraser | A/g National Manager Passengers | Australian Customs Service | ||
Patricia | Georgee | Section Head Legislation Reform Section | OTS, DOTARS | NO | X |
Stephen | Goodwin | General Manager of Operations | Brisbane Airport Corporation | NO | NO |
Phill | Grabham | Secretariat | OTS, DOTARS | X | X |
David | Gray | General Manager, Group Security, Strategy and Support | Qantas | X | X |
Rod | Grimshaw | National Security Manager | NO | X | |
Scott | Hill | Security Services Manager | X | X | |
Michael | Howard | Airservices Manager, Office of Security Risk Management | X | X | |
Cheryl | Johnson | Section Head, Regional Skies | OTS | NO | X |
Travis | Jones | Security & Emergency Response Manager | Melbourne Airport | X | NO |
John | McArdle | Chief Executive Officer | Adelaide Airport Corporation | X | X |
Graham | Operations Auditor / Investigator | Melbourne Airport | X | NO | |
Jenny | Morris | Section Head Aviation Security Policy | OTS, DOTARS | X | X |
John | Nahyna | General Manager Operations | Melbourne Airport | X | X |
Rob | OBrien | Terminal Manager | Melbourne Airport | X | NO |
John | Rees | Acting Assistant Secretary, Entry Policy & Procedures Branch | NO | NO | |
Paul | Retter | Executive Director, OTS | DOTARS | X | X |
Phil | Scanlon | National Security Manager | X | X | |
Vince | Scanlon | Manager Aviation and Infrastructure | Adelaide Airport Corporation | X | X |
Andrew | Tongue | Deputy Secretary, OTS | DOTARS | X | X |
Derek | Trafford | Compliance & Quality Assurance Manager | X | X | |
Steve | Whitmore | General Manager Airports Operations | Westralia Airports Corp | X | X |
Richard | Windeyer | General Manager | OTS | X | X |
Aviation Security Policy and Legislation Branch | |||||
Grant | Woods | General Manager Airport Operations | Sydney Airport Corp | NO | X |
Apologies:
Geoff Breust (Rex) | Todd Frew (DIMA) | John Rees (DIMA) |
| (SACL) | (Brisbane Airport) | Peter Yuile (AQIS, DAFF) |
Occupational Health and Safety (Commonwealth Employment) (National Standards) Amendment Regulations 2006 (No. 2), Select Legislative Instrument 2006 No. 9
30 March 2006
The Hon Kevin Andrews MP
Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations
Suite MG.48
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Dear Minister
I refer to the Occupational Health and Safety (Commonwealth Employment) (National Standards) Amendment Regulations 2006 (No. 2), Select Legislative Instrument 2006 No. 9. These Regulations amend the principal Regulations to give effect to the national standard for the Storage and Handling of Workplace Dangerous Goods. After considering these Regulations, the Committee raises the following matters
First, regulation 8.15 imposes an obligation on an employer to identify hazards that are associated with the storage or handling of dangerous goods at the workplace. Subregulation 8.15(2) supplies a non-inclusive list of matters that are to be taken into account in identifying such hazards. Paragraph 8.15(2)(g) requires an employer to consider ‘the kind and characteristics of incidents associated with the dangerous goods’. The ambit of the word ‘incidents’ is unclear. It is not clear whether it is restricted to incidents at the employer’s workplace, or whether it refers to incidents that have occurred generally at other workplaces. If it has the latter meaning, it is not clear whether an employer is therefore obliged to keep informed regarding such incidents. The Committee would appreciate clarification about this requirement.
Secondly, subregulation 8.27(4) imposes an obligation on an employer to review an emergency plan at certain times. No offence is specified for a failure to comply with this obligation. The Committee would appreciate your advice about whether this is intended to be an offence-creating provision. Further, under subparagraph 8.27(4)(b) the obligation to review an emergency plan arises if there is a change in circumstances at the workplace. The ambit of the phrase ‘change in circumstances’ is unclear and is not defined. The Committee therefore suggests that the subregulation should include some guidance as to what constitutes a ‘change in circumstances’ for this purpose.
The Committee would appreciate your advice on the above matters as soon as possible, but before 5 May 2006, to enable it to finalise its consideration of these Regulations. Correspondence should be directed to the Chairman, Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances, Room SG49, Parliament House, Canberra.
Yours sincerely
John Watson
Chairman
31 May 2006
Mr John Watson
Chairman
Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Dear Mr Watson
Thank you for your letter of 30 March 2006 concerning the Occupational Health and Safety (Commonwealth Employment) (National Standards) Amendment Regulations 2006 (No 2) (the Regulations). I provide the following comments in response to the concerns raised in your letter:
1. The ambit of the word ‘incidents’
The term ‘incident’ does not have any special meaning beyond its ordinary use, and as such is not defined in the Regulations. The Macquarie Dictionary defines incident as “an occurrence or event”. The term is used in the Dangerous Goods Regulations at paragraphs 8.04 (4); 8.15(2)(g); 8.16(2)(b); 8.26(b)(ii); 8.27(2)(b)(ii). Each reference lends itself to be interpreted and applied in accordance with the Macquarie Dictionary definition.
2. Identifying hazards—The ambit of ‘the kind and characteristics’
Paragraph 8.15(2)(g) specifies that the employer take into account ‘the kind and characteristics of incidents associated with dangerous goods’. This requires that the employer, in identifying hazards associated with the storage and handling of dangerous goods at the workplace, has regard to the kind and characteristics of any specific occurrence or event at the employers’ workplace associated with dangerous goods, as well as any relevant incidents occurring at other workplaces, of which the employer is aware.
The Regulations do not place an obligation upon the employer to keep informed of incidents occurring outside their workplace. However, under the emplo