weekly hansard - Queensland Parliament - Queensland Government

More documents

Recommendations

Info

23 Aug 2005 Questions Without Notice 2555 The people of Queensland have to make a choice on this matter, and the choice is very simple. We have here the Leader of the Opposition attempting to misrepresent what Tony Morris has put to the government and what I have said to this House today pursuant to the meeting that took place. We have, on the one hand, the usual deceit and dishonesty— Mr SPRINGBORG: I rise to a point of order, Mr Speaker. I find those— Mr BEATTIE: I withdraw. The people of Queensland have the option to either believe the inference in the question put by the Leader of the Opposition today, which is that the government has not agreed to a request by Tony Morris, or to believe Tony Morris. It is a very simple choice. I know who they will believe: they will believe Tony Morris. I have made it clear, and I am delighted to see that Tony Morris shares this view—he shared this view with the Deputy Premier, the Minister for Health and me this morning in our discussions—that we need to get on and start fixing the system. What the Leader of the Opposition and the National Party want is for the problems to continue for political reasons. We want this fixed, and that is why we set up these inquiries. It is not true to suggest, and it is dishonest to suggest, that there has been any further request for an extension beyond 14 October. We had a communication suggesting there needed to be an extension to finish matters. There were discussions that took place and out of those discussions it was agreed that 14 October was suitable. Now that is the way you do business. The commissioner indicated that he wanted an extension. We negotiated a sensible agreement with him and he has agreed to the 14th. I agree with him and I stand by our extension. Sale of Telstra Ms JARRATT: My question is directed to the Premier. There has been a lot of discussion about the full sale of Telstra. Could the Premier detail to the House how much of the money from the full sale of Telstra will be returned to the bush? Mr BEATTIE: I have to say that it is really hard to find out. I am intrigued by the dishonesty going on in the National Party. We had Barnaby Jones— A government member: Joyce! Mr BEATTIE: Joyce. Well, it could be Barnaby Jones. The way he is going, I know whom the locomotive is going to run over. The locomotive is going to run right over him. Mrs Lavarch: That was Casey Jones. Mr BEATTIE: Well I don’t care; they are still part of the family. There have been some numbers bandied around such as $5 billion. That is what he said on the Channel 9 Sunday program. I will table that for the information of the House in case someone wants to argue about it. Then on 17 August at a press conference the Prime Minister, John Howard, said that the package was worth $1.1 billion plus $2 billion in a trust fund, which means a total of $3.1 billion, which is what the package is worth. I notice that the Nationals managed to snow Queensland Country Life. It said that the Nationals have all but accepted a $6 billion package to bolster regional telecommunications despite polling showing that most Australians are still against privatisation. I table that. Then, of course, we have the Australian, which states— Telstra is about to be sold after the Nationals won a $3.2 billion package for additional services to the bush. Then the Australian of 19 August—the poor old Leader of the Opposition could not work it out, either; he was scratching his head—stated— Nationals state leader Lawrence Springborg questioned the size of the trust fund for future services, saying federal leader Mark Vaile had suggested $2 billion, Senator Joyce $5 billion and a think tank $7 billion. I table that report. The truth of it is that it is $3.1 billion. Frankly, it amounts to 30 pieces of silver. No-one should be in any doubt about this: if the National Party supports the sale of Telstra it supports selling out the bush and the regions for 30 pieces of silver. I listened to the member for Whitsunday and her concerns. There are areas in the city with problems. The other day I was driving down Raymont Road in the Grange and my mobile phone dropped out. The member for Stafford is my neighbouring member; he has the same problem on the same road. Mr Terry Sullivan: We haven’t got broadband in Stafford. Mr BEATTIE: Exactly. Let us move on, and let us look at what the people in the bush are saying—not what the sell-out merchants from the National Party are saying. AgForce president Peter Kenny made a point last week on PM with Lisa Millar. He said— It’s amazing that the government have started with two billion, and it’s like an auction system, as far as I can see. As far as AgForce is concerned there doesn’t seem to be any basis upon which they’re coming up with this funding. And who’s to say what $3 billion will look like in 10 to 15 years time, and we’re talking about an organisation that’s going to have to serve rural and regional Queensland for the next God knows how long, but certainly well into the future. The New South Wales Farmers Federation said that it does not believe the money pledged to fix phone services in the bush is enough. Do members remember the heritage trails system? Billions were thrown away on that.
2556 Questions Without Notice 23 Aug 2005 Health System Mr QUINN: My question is to the Premier. I refer the Premier to the Fitzgerald inquiry into police corruption, which had no fixed date for reporting to allow Commissioner Fitzgerald to fully investigate all the issues and to do the job properly, and I ask: given that health is clearly the No. 1 priority in the minds of Queenslanders, can the Premier give a non-political reason why this inquiry should be bound by fixed reporting dates? Mr BEATTIE: As I understand it—and I will go back and check this—on a number occasions there were changes. They related particularly to the terms of reference of the Fitzgerald royal commission. There is no big deal about this. In relation to both the racing inquiry and the Bundaberg Hospital inquiry there were requests by the commissioners for extensions. Both of those have been granted. Today we have agreed to a two-week extension. I say to the Leader of the Liberal Party that the commissioner himself is happy with the arrangements. Why is it that the member for Robina or the Leader of the Opposition seem to know more than the commissioner does? The reality is that the commissioner has agreed with the time lines. For the life of me, I cannot understand why the member for Robina is wanting to pursue this, other than for some cheap political agenda. If Tony Morris is saying that 15 October gives suitable time to meet the natural justice requirements and to hear witnesses, what sort of wisdom does the member have that is stronger than that of Tony Morris? The member has to ask himself that. For the life of me, I cannot see a sensible, logical point to the member’s argument other than the fact that there is some political agenda. Let me just repeat: today the government has agreed to extend the Morris royal commission by 15 days. That was mutually agreed between us. Mr Messenger interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Member for Burnett, I warn you. You sit there and you interject all of the time. I warn you under 253. Mr BEATTIE: I say to the Leader of the Liberal Party: I know that when you were in government— An opposition member interjected. Mr BEATTIE: Let us talk about the Connolly-Ryan inquiry. Let us talk about the Leader of the Liberal Party’s form on this. When he was in government he set up a process to destroy and shut down the CJC through the Connolly-Ryan inquiry. There has been none of that from us. That inquiry was in exactly the same position: the member opposite wanted to shut it down. It is the height of hypocrisy for the member for Robina to come in here and attack us, bearing in mind that we have set this inquiry up and that we have agreed to a two-week extension, as requested by the commissioner which we agreed after discussion. But the member really has a bit of a hide when we consider what happened to the CJC inquiry and the Supreme Court action in relation to Connolly-Ryan. The member knows that as well as I do. These two questions have been based on politics, not on what is in the interests of patients. I need to be very clear to this House: there needs to be a day when the inquiries are finished and we get on with the business of improving and repairing the health system. That is exactly what we will do. That is why on the 30th we will deal with the systemic issues—we will have both Peter Forster’s and Tony Morris’s recommendations in relation to systemic issues—and then Tony Morris will have an extension of two weeks to deal with witnesses pertaining to Bundaberg. I conclude my remarks by congratulating the member for Robina on the success in Chatsworth and Redcliffe on the weekend. I did not enjoy it, but I can say to you: well done. Infrastructure Development, South-East Queensland Mr REEVES: My question without notice is to the Premier. South-east Queenslanders are aware of the state government’s infrastructure plans to deal with the influx of a million people over the next 20 years to south-east Queensland, but can he inform them what the Liberals, particularly those based in Brisbane and south-east Queensland, are contributing? Mr BEATTIE: I was intrigued to read today’s Courier-Mail, as I always am, which carried the headline ‘Libs try to hush Newman on roads’. What a serious indictment of liberalism in this state. The Liberal Party has the strongest representation perhaps in the history of federal parliament. I am not sure about that, but it is very strong. It has 22 out of 28 seats. In Brisbane it has the lord mayor. When the lord mayor tries to get some money to deal with public transport and roads, what do they do? They try to hush him up and shut him down. Then they try to bully him into remaining silent. I just say to Campbell
Page 1 and 2: PROOF ISSN 1322-0330 WEEKLY HANSARD
Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents — Tuesday, 23 A
Page 5 and 6: 2536 Papers 23 Aug 2005 PAPERS PAPE
Page 7 and 8: 2538 Ministerial Statement 23 Aug 2
Page 19 and 20: 2550 Scrutiny of Legislation Commit
Page 21 and 22: 2552 Private Members’ Statements
Page 23: 2554 Questions Without Notice 23 Au
Page 27 and 28: 2558 Questions Without Notice 23 Au
Page 33 and 34: 2564 Members’ Ethics and Parliame
Page 35 and 36: 2566 Matters of Public Interest 23
Page 45 and 46: 2576 Constitutional and Other Legis
Page 47 and 48: 2578 Transport Legislation Amendmen
Page 49 and 50: 2580 Transport Legislation Amendmen
Page 51 and 52: 2582 Housing Legislation Amendment
Page 53 and 54: 2584 Education (Queensland College
Page 55 and 56: 2586 Succession Amendment Bill 23 A
Page 57 and 58: 2588 Succession Amendment Bill 23 A
Page 59 and 60: 2590 Queensland Competition Authori
Page 69 and 70: 2600 Racing Venues Development Amen
Page 75 and 76:
2606 Racing Venues Development Amen
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
2612 Plumbing and Drainage and Othe
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
2630 Child Safety Legislation Amend
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
2642 Adjournment 23 Aug 2005 One pa
Page 113 and 114:
2644 Adjournment 23 Aug 2005 years.
Page 115:
2646 Adjournment 23 Aug 2005 Finall
show all

weekly hansard - Queensland Parliament - Queensland Government

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?