Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

TUESDAY, 1 AUGUST 1978

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

QUEENSLAND

,Debates Parliamentary [HANSARD]

FIRST, SESSION OF THE FORTY-SECOND PARLIAMENT-continued

(Second Period)

TUESDAY, 1 AUGUST 1978

Under the provisions of the motion for special adjournment agreed to by the House on 1 June 1978, the House met at 11 a.m.

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. J. E. H. Houghton, Redcliffe) read prayers and took ,the chair.

ASSENT TO BILLS

Assent to the following Bills reported by Mr. Speaker:-

Appropriation Bill (No. 1); State Government Insurance Office

(Queensland) Act Amendment Bill; Workers' Compensation Act Amendment

Bill; Trade Coupons Act Repeal Bill; Weights and Measures Act Amendment

Bill; Financial Arrangements and Develop­

ment Aid Acts Repeal Bill; Life Assurance Companies Act Amend­

ment Bill; Local Government Grants Commission

(Ratification of Actions) Bill; Golden Casket Art Union Bill; Superannuation Acts Amendment Bill; Brisbane Cricket Ground Act Amend-

ment Bill; Small Claims Tribunals Act Amendment

Bill; Legal Aid Bill; Contractors' Trust Accounts Act Amend­

ment Bill; 63226----49

Securities Industry Act Amendment Bill; Maintenance Act and Another Act

Amendment Bill; Real Property Act Amendment Bill; Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill; Liquor Act Amendment Bill; Status of Children Bill; V.I.P. Insurances Limited (Motor

Vehicles Insurance) Bill; Police Act Amendment Bill; Surveyors Act Amendment Bill; City of Brisbane Market Act Amendment

Bill; Dairy Produce Bill; Hen Quotas Act Amendment Bill; Racing and Betting Act Amendment

Bill; Pharmacy Act Amendment Bill; Cremation Act Amendment Bill; Hospitals Act Amendment Bill; Roads (Contribution to Maintenance) Act

Amendment Bill; Constitution Act Amendment Bill; Local Government (Adjustment of

Boundaries) Bill; Litter Act Amendment Bill; Clean Air Act Amendment Bill; Picture Theatres and Films Act Amend­

ment Bill; Building Act Amendment Bill; Sewerage and Water Supply Act Amend­

ment Bill; Local Government Superannuation Act

Amendment Bill; Local Government Act Amendment Bill; Noise Abatement Bill.

1454 Ministerial Statements [1 AUGUST 1978) Papers

PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED BY MEMBERS IN MAKING INQUIRIES

AND REQUESTS

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! Honourable members, I would like to draw the attention of the House to a practice that was evident in the last sitting of Parliament, a practice that will no longer be tolerated. Members were coming up to the Speaker's dais and making requests about the asking of urgent questions. In future all representations of members of Parliament will go through the respective Whips and the Leader of the House. I do not want anyone coming up to tell me that he has an urgent question that must be asked today or something like that. In future all necessary arrangements will be made through the respective Whips.

There is another matter that I wish to d.raw to the attention of members, par­ticularly Government members. Members have been moving from their seats and sitting on the ministerial benches. That will not be tolerated in future.

Any member of the House who is seeking information from or trying to arrange a deputation with a Minister will do so in the lobby or Cabinet room. I am going to be very firm and rigid about these practices, and I ask for the co-operation of all honour­able members.

AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS

SEPARATE REPORTS ON ACCOUNTS OF THE PORT OF BRISBANE AUTHORITY AND THE STATE

WHEAT BoARD

Mr. SPEAKER announced the receipt from the Auditor-General of his separate reports on the accounts of the Port of Brisbane Authority and the State Wheat Board for the year 1976-77.

Ordered to be printed.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

DELEGATIONS OF AUTHORITY: MINISTER FOR CULTURE, NATIONAL PARKS AND RECREATION;

AND MINISTER FOR LABOUR RELATIONS

Hon . .J. B.JELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah ~Premier) (11.7 a.m.): I desire to inform the House that in connection with the overseas visit of the Minister for Culture, National Parks and Recreation, the Deputy Governor, for and on behalf of His Excel­lency the Governor, by virtue of the provisions of the Officials in Parliament Act 1896-1975, authorised and empowered the Honourable Victor Bruce Sullivan, M.L.A., Minister for Primary Industries, to perform and exercise all or any of the duties, powers and authorities imposed or conferred upon the Minister for Culture, National Parks and Recreation by any Act, rule, practice or ordinance on and from 24 July 1978, and until the return to Queensland of the Honourable Thomas Guy Newbery, M.L.A.

I lay upon the table of the House a copy of the Queensland Government Gazette of 22 July 1978 notifying this arrangement.

I also desire to inform the House that in connection with the overseas visit of the Minister for Labour Relations, His Excel­lency the Governor, by virtue of the provisions of the Officials in Parliament Act 1896-1975, authorised and empowered the Honourable Llewellyn Roy Edwards, M.B., B.S., M.L.A., Minister for Health, to per­form and exercise all or any of the duties, powers and authorities imposed or conferred upon the Minister for Labour Relations by any Act, rule, practice or ordinance on and from 29 July 1978, and until the return to Queensland of the Honourable Frederick Alexander Campbell, M.L.A.

I lay upon the table of the House a copy of the Queensland Government Gazette of 29 July 1978 notifying this arrangement.

Whereupon the honourable gentleman laid the Queensland Government Gazettes on the table.

LEADER OF THE HOUSE

Hon. J. BJEL!\:E-PETERSEN (Barambah -Premier) (11.9 a.m.): I desire to inform the House that during the absence of the Honourable T. G. Newbery, M.L.A., Mini­ster for Culture, National Parks and Recreation, arrangements have been made, and you, Mr. Speaker, have been notified accordingly, for the Honourable C. A. Wharton, M.L.A., Minister for Works and Housing, to carry out the duties of the Leader of the House.

PAPERS The following papers were laid on the

table, and ordered to be printed:-Reports-

State Electricity Commission of Queens­land, for 1977-78.

The Under Secretary for Mines, for 1977.

Board of Trustees of the Queensland Museum, for 1977.

Griffith University, for 1977. The following papers were laid on the

table-Proclamations under-

Acquisition of Land Act 1967-1977 and the State and Regional Planning and Development, Public Works Organi­zation and Environmental Control Act 1971-1974.

The Sugar Acquisition Act of 1915. Forestry Act 1959-1976. Torres Strait Islanders Act 1971-1975. Aborigines Act 1971-1975.

Orders in Council under-State and Regional Planning and

Development, Public Works Organi­zation and Environmental Control Act 1971-1974 and the Local Bodies' Loans Guarantee Act 1923-1975.

Papers [1 AUGUST 1978] Death of Ex-Members 1455

Queensland Film Industry Development Act 1977.

Audit Acts Amendment Act 1926-1971. Police Act 1937-1978. Explosives Act 1952-1975. City of Brisbane Market Act 1960--1978. Primary Producers' Co-operative Associ-

ations Act 1923-1978. Stock Act 1915-1976. Sugar Experiment Stations Act 1900--

1976. Wheat Pool Act 1920-1972. Harbours Act 1955-1976. Forestry Act 1959-1976. Barrier Fences Act 1954-1972. The Stock Routes and Rural Lands

Protection Acts, 1944 to 1967. Water Act 1926-1976. Irrigation Act 1922-1977. Ambulance Services Act 1967-1975. Grammar Schools Act 1975 and the

Local Bodies' Loans Guarantee Act 1923-1975.

Industrial Development Act 1963-1976. State Housing Act 1945-1974. The Supreme Court Act of 1921. District Courts Act 1967-1976. Magistrates Courts Act 1921-1976.

Regulations under-Public Service Act 1922-1976. Fire Brigades Act 1964--1977. Miners' Homestead Leases Act 1913-

1976. Mining Act 1968-1976. Petroleum Act 1923-1976. Agricultural Standards Act 1952-1972. Meat Industry Act 1965-1977. Primary Producers' Co-operative Associ­

ations Act 1923-1978. Primary Producers' Organisation and

Marketing Act 1926-1976. Harbours Act 1955-1976. Queensland Marine Act 1958-1975. Pollution of Waters by Oil Act 1973. The Canals Acts, 1958 .to 1960. Water Act 1926-1976. Irrigation Act 1922-1977. Ambulance Services Act 1967-1975. Radioactive Substances Act 1958-1970. Health Act 1937-1976. Cremation Act 1913-1978. Hospitals Act 1936-1978.

By-laws Nos. 1085 to 1091 under the Railways Act 1914--1976.

Statutes under the University of Queens­land Act 1965-1973.

Notifications under-The Soil Conservation Act of 1965. Forestry Act 1959-1976.

DEATHS OF HON. SIR KENNETH JAMES MORRIS, K.B.E., C.M.G., and

MR. W. E. BAXTER

MoTION OF CoNDOLENCE

Hon. J. BJELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah -Premier) (11.17 a.m.), by leave, without notice: I move-

"1. That this House desires to place on record its appreciation of the services rendered to this State by the late Honour­able Sir Kenneth Morris, K.B.E., C.M.G., a former member of the Parliament of Queensland and Minister of the Crown, and William Edward Baxter, Esquire, a former member of the Parliament of Queensland.

"2. That Mr. Speaker be requested to convey to the widows and families of the deceased gentlemen the above resolution, together with an expression of the sym­pathy and sorrow of the members of the Parliament of Queensland, in the loss they have sustained."

Sir Kenneth James Morris, who died suddenly on 1 June last, was a man of great energy and drive who left his mark on Queensland and this House. Many of us in this Chamber, I am sure, have very clear and vivid memories of Sir Kenneth Morris and his contributions to this Parliament and the State generally in so many directions. He was instrumental, for example, in building up our tourist industry, introducing new investment and secondary industry into this State, and lay­ing the foundations of Brisbane's expanding system of transportation and traffic control. Most importantly, it was through his diplo­macy and dedication to principles as leader of the Liberal Party and his proven ability to work closely with the then Country Party leader, Mr.-later, Sir Francis-Nicklin, that this coalition came into being as the Govern­ment in 1957. Indeed, the harmonious relationships between Sir Kenneth and the then Country Party set the solid foundations upon which the success of the present coali­tion has been built.

Sir Kenneth entered this House in 1944 as member for Enoggera under the banner of the Queensland People's Party. Following a redistribution, he represented the Mt. Coot-tha seat from 1950 onwards. He served as Liberal Party Whip from 1944 till 1950. He was deputy leader from 1950 till 1954 and Liberal leader from 1954 till 1962. When Sir Thomas Hiley stepped down as Deputy Leader of the Opposition in 1954, it was Ken Morris who succeeded him. Sir Ken­neth was Deputy Premier and Minister for Labour and Industry from 1957 until 1962. This portfolio also included tourism, second­ary industries, industrial relations and police.

He retired from State politics in 1963 to pioneer the growing of tropical legume seeds near Cooktown in North Queensland. From there he took up a successful career in the Commonwealth Senate, as many of us will recall. He served with distinction as a Liberal senator from 1963 until 1968, and

1456 Death of Ex-Members (1 AUGUST 1978) Death of Ex-Members

was honoured by Her Majesty the Queen in 1964 with a C.M.G. for services rendered to the State. Sir Kenneth was one of the original Tobruk Rats during World War II and served with distinction in England, North Africa, Syria and New Guinea.

I personally remember him as a friend. He was a fluent speaker and a quick thinker who pursued an aggressive and hard-hitting debating style and was one of the most seasoned political speakers of his day.

As befitting his service and the long hours devoted to the advancement of the State of Queensland, he was knighted in 1968 by the Queen as a Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire.

Sir Kenneth was born in Brisbane in 1903 and died here in his 75th year. He is survived by his wife, Lady Ettie, three sons and a daughter. I am sure that all honourable members will join with me in extending to Lady Morris and the surviving family of Sir Kenneth our sympathy at the loss that they, the Parliament of Queensland and the people generally have suffered.

I should also like to place on record the services of \Villiam Edward Baxter, or, as he was known, Bill Baxter, who died suddenly on 5 July 1978 at the age of 71. He was an active and respected member of this House for 13 years and gave dedica:ted and faithful service to the Australian Labor Party while it was in Government and after its defeat in 1957.

Mr. Baxter was elected for the seat of Norman and served in that capacity from 7 March 1953 to 28 May 1960, and there­after for the seat of Hawthorne until 28 May 1966. He enjoyed a substantial personal following but lost his pre-selection and at the subsequent election stood as an Indepen­dent. The seat was then won by ihe Liberal candidate. I think he will be remembered by many now sitting in this House as a member who was keenly interested in the affairs of Brisbane and Queensland generally.

Mr. Baxter was born in Chinchilla. He played Rugby League for Roma and was a football referee in Brisbane. He was a very popular lawn bowler and before his death instructed at the Bramble Bay Bowling Club at Redcliffe. Before entering Parliament he was employed by the Queensland Railways in a variety of functions.

Mr. Baxter was a resident of Redcliffe at the time of his death and it is with regret that I extend the sympathy of this House as well as my own personal regrets to his widow, May, at the passing of this long­serving former member.

Hon. W. E. KNOX (Nundah-Deputy Premier and Treasurer) (11.23 a.m.): In seconding the motion I join with the Premier in extending condolences to the relatives of the late former members of this House. I should particularly like to refer more fully to some of the details outlined by the Pre­mier.

The late Bill Baxter was well known to me and served in this House with me for some nine or 10 years. He was a very active member. In fact, he was Australian Labor Party Whip for a period and it was always possible to get close to him. He was very highly regarded by all of those who served in this House with him. He was a very friendly person with whom I enjoyed a drink and a conversation on many occasions.

A ,tremendous amount of pressure was placed on him from time to time. None of us are immune from these pressures, as those in the House know only too well. On occas­ions, the problems press down very heavily on individuals. I know that, in the case of Bill BaX:ter, they were very great indeed, but that is part of the responsibility that a person accepts when he enters Parliament. It is not meant to be an easy road. I sincerely believe that critics of politicians in Parliament are often not aware of the ,tremendous input into community life which many members provide.

In the case of Bill Baxter he was enorm­ously active in his electorate. There was not an organisation with which he did not have very close contact. It was not just a casual relationship; he was heavily involved with all of them. He was a very assiduous member in the representations that he made not only on behalf of the organisations with which he was associated but also on behalf of many people who came to him for assistance.

He joined the Parliament in 1953 as the member for Norman and was on the Govern­ment side of the House at that time. He held that seat for some years. He was most active as an officer of his union before he entered Parliament, and served his union extremely well. Although he had many political pressures upon him, he was able to withstand them and he was always a very cheery and helpful person in the House. I add my condolences to the relatives of Bill Baxter, of whom we have fond memories.

Sir Kenneth Morris, of course, was a man well respected by all. He came into this Parliament as a member of the Queensland People's Party. He was a soldier. He was State Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party and eventually became Deputy Premier and Leader of the Parliamentary Liberal Party.

He eventually became a Federal senator. Wherever he went, he was always an active citizen. The Premier has already dealt with his career in this House. It was a very distinguished one. His parliamentary career in both the State and Federal Parliaments is well known to a number of honourable mem­bers in this House and to others who followed it. He had a distinguished record. He was a major in the Army and saw active service at Tobruk and in a number of other theatres of war.

I should like to make some special refer­ence to Sir Kenneth Morris's role as a senator representing this State, which was subsequent to his term in this House. He

Death of Ex-Members [1 AUGUST 1978] Death of Ex-Members 1457

brought to that office many of the attributes that he revealed in this Parliament both as a parliamentarian and as Deputy Premier. As a senator he saw his job as representing his State in the States' House. Very often this principle is overlooked in today's party politics. He was always interested in projects and matters associated with Queensland. He was a constant advocate for getting these projects under way. He was always available to those Queenslanders who wanted to see him and assisted them in any manner that would advance the cause of this State. Having had experience as a State member of Parlia­ment and as a member of the Executive of this State, he played a very vital role in the Senate. His special interests and associa­tions stood him in good stead in his years as a senator.

After leaving the Senate he maintained his record of service to the State when he estab­lished himself in North Queensland. He built up a property in the Cooktown area. In fact, I believe he began the first milk delivery service there. It was typical of the man that where there was a need he was always ready to try to do something about it. He enjoyed the respect and the support of the people around him wherever he went, whether in Brisbane, Brookfield, where he originally established himself in the egg industry, or in Cooktown, where he developed a property.

The knighthood that he received was prob­ably small recompense for a lifetime of enormous service to the community he served, particularly in the political arena. Sir Ken­neth will be remembered at many levels in this society and nation, in the commercial world, in the political world and in community life. His interests and influence touched on many aspects of the life of the community, and I am sure his memory will be cherished for a long time by those who were associated with him.

Mr. BURNS (Lytton-Leader of the Opposition) (11.30 a.m.): I join the Opposi­tion in the motion moved by the Premier and seconded by the Deputy Premier and Treasurer. Again we meet after a recess and find ourselves speaking to motions of condolence for past members. On most occasions many of us in the House have never met these former members and have only read about them, but I knew Sir Kenneth Morris or, as I knew him at the time, Ken Morris, and, of course, I knew Bill Baxter very well.

When I came out of the Air Force in 1957, the split was occurring in the Labor Party and at that time Sir Kenneth was the leading light in the Liberal Party. It is true to say, as the Premier said, that he, along with Artie Fadden, Sir Francis Nicklin and others, was the one who kept the coalition groups together in such a \Vay that they were able to take advantage of the split in the Labor Party at that time and become the Government of this State.

I remember Ken Morris from public meet­ings I attended. In those days electioneering was not conducted on television or radio to

the extent that it is today. People attended fairly big public meetings at the old stadium, and attendances of 2,000 or 3,000 people were not uncommon. There is no doubt that Ken Morris acquitted himself well at such meetings.

I offer the condolences of the Opposition to his family. I know that the families of members of Parliament are subjected to a lot of pressure during the period in which mem­bers serve. When one thinks of Ken Morris's service with the 6th and 9th Divisions, as a Rat of Tobruk, as a member of Parlia­ment both in Opposition and in Government, and then as a senator over such a long period, one realises the many hours that he spent working for the community when he could have spent them with his family. They will greatly miss him now but they would have missed his company in those days too, and especially the parental guid­ance' he could have given to his children.

I knew Bill Baxter very well. When I came out of the Air Force in 1957 I shifted to Kedron and then to Norman. I became president of the Norman E.E.C. when Bill was the member for Norman. I suppose it would be appropriate to describe Bill as a volatile character. He was a very excitable man but he had a tremendous grasp of the affai~s of his local community. I have never seen a man who could go into various streets in an area and know so many people. He would call into houses for a cup of tea with a lady here and someone else there. He knew the members of the pensioners' organisations and the bowling clubs. We found later on when Bill had a dispute with the party and ran as an independent right at the end of his political career that one of the reasons why we could not retain the seat was the strong personal vote he received from those people he had helped over the years.

But I would not like to remember Bill Baxter for the period when he ran against the Labor Party at the end of his career; I would like to remember him as a Labor man who stood by us during the period of the split when there were debates in this House and in the newspapers about who was going to stand by the Labor Party and who was going to leave it. At that time Bill Baxter was one of those who made the decision to stay with the Labor Party. He deserves great credit for that decision, especially from those of us on this side of the House. Bill's family, too, worked very hard in politics. I had not seen Bill for years before his death, but I remember his daughter Betty, who was a hard worker for the party-also unfortunately deceased-and his wife May.

On behalf of the Opposition I offer our condolences to the families of both men; I wish them well and hope that things work out as they would want them to.

Hon. W. D. LICKISS (Mt. Coot-tha­Minister for Justice and Attorney-General) (11.34 a.m.): I join with the Honourable

1458 Death of Ex-Members [1 AUGUST 1978) Questions Without Notice

the Premier and the Deputy Premier in this motion of condolence. Ken Morris, whom I had the honour to succeed in this place, was a person who was and is highly respected in the electorate of Mt. Coot-tha. As has already been stated, he had a distinguished war record and rose to the rank of major. He served his country well in both war and peace. His contribution to the Queensland division of the Liberal Party was one of outstanding success. He served his party and electorate well, and I join with the other members of this House in expressing my very sincere sympatl- y to Lady Morris, his family and relatives.

I had the pleasure of serving in this Chamber while Bill Baxter was still a mem­ber of this Assembly, and I think that the Leader of the Opposition's description of him fits very well.

I join with the Premier, the Deputy Pre­mier and the Leader of the Opposition in expressing my sincere sympathy to the rela­tives of the late William Baxter.

Hon. C. R. PORTER (Toowong-Minister for Aboriginal and Island Affairs) (11.36 a.m.): As the Leader of the Opposition said, it is always a melancholy occasion when one returns to this Chamber and finds that it is necessary to move motions of condolence to the relatives of former members of this Assembly who have passed on.

I knew Bill Baxter; not in the House, but we exchanged the usual pleasantries that I, as State campaign director, exchanged with the opposition when I went round on polling day. He was a very even-natured, cheerful man who never let his politics spill over into the area of his personal relation­ships with people. Bill Baxter was not only a very fine man but also a great worker in his electorate, as I knew to my cost as State campaign director. The Liberal Party found it very difficult indeed to make much impact in his electorate.

I had a very long association with Ken Morris. I was part of his selection process and ran his first campaign as State cam­paign director of the Queensland Liberal Party, and, of course, our association was very close during the long, long days when we were in Opposition in this Chamber. It sometimes seemed that those clays in Opposi­tion would never end. The association con­tinued when Ken became party leader and then Deputy Premier. As the present Deputy Premier said, Ken Morris's career extended after his period in this House, when he became a senator in what I regard as per­haps the most remarkable electoral feat ever recorded in Queensland political his­tory. Then, for a great many years, we were near neighbours at Brookfield when our families were growing up together.

It may surprise honourable members to know that when Ken first went into politics he was a very shy person and far from being a fluent speaker. Indeed, he found great difficulty in mastering the ability to speak well in public. It is difficult for

people who can remember his capacity in this regard later to recognise this. But he came back from the war with a burn­ing dedication, a deep sense of responsibility that he had to play a part in fashioning the world that many of his comrades did not live to see. He was a man with great grass roots common sense. It may well be said that he did not have one of the world's great intellects-who amongst us has?-but he had common sense, courage and resolu­tion. When one allies that background to his close family and community involve­ment, one finds a number of qualities that I suggest could well be emulated by those who are in the political field today. He was a good friend, a good leader, a good husband, and a good father, and I think all of us could be well satisfied if we believed that that could be said about any one of us when we have passed on.

I extend my personal sympathy to the Morris family and to the Baxter family.

Motion (Mr. Bjelke-Petersen) agreed to, honourable members standing in silence.

QUESTION UPON NOTICE lv!EAT-PROCESSING COMPANIES' OWNERSHIP

OF CATTLE HERDS

Mr. Lester, pursuant to notice, asked the Minister for Primary Industries-

What percentage of Queensland cattle herds is owned by meat-processing com­panies or their subsidiaries?

Answer:-In view of the time lapse between sit­

tings, I answered the honourable member's question by letter of 13 June, a copy of which I now table for the information of the House.

Whereupon the honourable gentleman laid the copy of the letter on the table.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

ACCOMMODATION FOR LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION AND STAFF

Mr. BURNS: In asking a question with­out notice of the Minister for Works and Housing, I refer to the Cabinet decision of 18 July to transfer my staff facilities from Parliament House to Watkins Place and the statement on Saturday by the Premier that the present quarters here are to be renovated.

Mr. Hinze: Where is your caravan?

Mr. BURNS: I will have it there shortly. Will you give me permission?

Mr. SPEAKER: Order!

Mr. BURNS: I ask the Minister for Works and Housing: What is the nature of such renovations? For what purpose will the room be used when they are

Questions Without Notice [1 AUGUST 1978] Questions Without Notice 1459

completed; I am talking about the staff office that we now have? Does the Cabinet decision also mean that there will be no provision for accomodation-don't tell him, Joh; he ought to be able to answer it himself; he is a responsible Minister.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order!

Mr. BURNS: Does the Cabinet decision also mean that there will be no provision for accommodation for Opposition staff in the new parliamentary wing, even though lengthy discussions have been held on this subject and designs still exist within the Minister's department for accommodation for Opposition staff in the new building? Is the space allocated to my staff in the new building now being given to the Executive Council or to Cabinet for its use?

Mr. WHARTON: I am surprised at being asked that question by the Leader of the Opposition. I was surprised at his news release, too. I was staggered. If I had thought I could get that kind of promotion, I would have jumped at it with both hands.

To answer the honourable member's question-this whole building will be renova­ted after we move into the new premises. The renovations will take some time, pro­bably a couple of years. Obviously the Government will be thinking of the member's staff. Cabinet has decided that it is appropriate to provide suitable offices for the Leader of the Opposition and his staff in Watkins Place. The Minister for Mines, Energy and Police occupies offices in that same building.

Mr. Burns: He's shifted down here to George Street, over in the new building.

Mr. WHARTON: He is in Watkins Place. Like other Ministers, he has his office up town, well away from this building.

I sympathise with the Leader of the Opposition, who apparently will have diffi­culty in getting to and from work. I also sympathise with his staff. This Gov­ernment always thinks of the employees.

Mr. R. J. Gibbs: Oh, go away!

Mr. WHARTON: The honourable mem­ber should think about it. We are looking after everybody's employees. We believe in looking after the working people.

Mr. Burns: Why can't my staff go into the new building?

Mr. WHARTON: The new building is designed to accommodate all members on an equal footing. No special provision is made in any other Parliament for the Leader of the Opposition and his staff. I point out that the Premier and the Treasurer have no provision for office staff in this building, nor has any other Minister. No Ministers have office staff here or even a typewriter for them to use. The Ministers

come to Parliament House from their res­pective offices in the city. The Leader of the Opposition will just have to get used to doing what they do.

BLUE TONGUE DISEASE

Mr. CASEY: I ask the Minister for Prim­ary Industries: As the so-called blue tongue virus has been found in New South Wales, what restrictions still exist in Queensland on the movement and slaughter of cattle in Queensland beyond the blue tongue line and why do these restrictions still apply? Have similar restrictions been implemented in New South Wales?

Mr. SULLIVAN: I thank the honourable member for his question. Only this morning I had discussions with my director-general and the Director of Marketing. In Sydney the Agricultural Council will be meeting next week and one of the matters to be discussed is the report put forward by the Animal Health Committee which deals with blue tongue. I cannot anticipate the decision that will be taken but I hope that, following the Agricultural Council meeting next week, I will be able to make a statement which could ease the situation.

Mr. Casey: The northern producers are being treated unfairly.

Mr. SULLIVAN: They are not being treated unfairly. We would be lacking in the discharge of our responsibilities if we did not do everything possible in this matter. If people try to import disease-ridden stock from other countries we will be as tough as the people in Hong Kong and Singapore have been. We are very conscious of the disad­vantages confronting our people and it is hoped that we will be able to relieve the situation. As I said, I hope to make an announcement next week.

REFORM OF A.L.P. IN QUEENSLAND

Mr. KATTER: I ask the Premier: Is the decision by the Federal Executive of the A.L.P. to reform the A.L.P. in Queensland proof that the "educrats" are now in firm control of the A.L.P. throughout Australia, and will this party, which once aspired to represent the workers in Australia, now represent the trendies and their peculiar philosophies? Further, could the Premier advise whether this investigation is a strong rebuke to the present Leader of the Opposi­tion, well known as a lackey of the trade­union controllers in Brisbane so soundly defeated by Mr. Beattie, a lawyer, and Dr. Murphy, an academic, of the reform group? Finally, can we expect the demise of Mr. Burns and the rise of the new A.L.P. as the academics' and lawyers' party of Queens­land?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: Of course, it is quite obvious to everyone in Queensland that the A.L.P. are in utter turmoil, and obviously what has been happening and what the news­papers have been saying recently is a strong

1460 Questions Without Notice [1 AuGUST 1978] Questions Without Notice

rebuke to the Queensland A.L.P. The people of Queensland, of course, have shown their disrespect for the A.L.P. in the way they have voted. The public have shown in no uncertain terms that the A.L.P. are in tur­moil and strife.

Probably the position of the A.L.P. could be summed up by saying that they are suffer­ing their 21st birthday pains during these days, because it is 21 years since the Left Wing threw the Right Wing out of the A.L.P. These are their 21st birthday cele­brations, and the problem is back with them again. It will always be with them while the Left Wing, the socialists, the radicals and all the rest of them are mixed up with them; nobody will ever want them. This inquiry by the Federal executive is nothing more than a little bit of window-dressing; it does not amount to anything. It will not fool or hoodwink the people of Queensland; that's for sure.

ETHNIC BROADCASTING STATION IN BRISBANE

Mr. FOURAS: In directing a question to the Premier, I draw his attention to a report appearing in an ethnic newspaper of a statement by the honourable member for Merthyr to the effect that he believed there is no need for an ethnic broadcasting station in Brisbane, which at the present time is the only mainland capital city without such a facility. I now ask: Are the honourable member's views shared by the Government?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: There are a lot of arguments for and against the setting up of an ethnic radio station in Brisbane. People coming to our country are very glad to come here, and we are pleased to have them. They contribute something to this State and nation. I agree with the sentiments expressed by the honourable member for Merthyr that matters such as this are dealt with largely in Canberra. But, apart from that, my Government makes these people very welcome and we help them in every way we can. They are, of course, fellow Queenslanders and fellow Australians. The assistance that our various departments give them meets fully their requirements and needs, without segregating these people or breaking them up into different groups.

Mr. Fouras: That means you wouldn't encourage your colleagues in Canberra--

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: The honour­~ble I?em?er :night need some special help m this directiOn; I can quite understand that.

WoRK-LOAD oF CHILD CARE OFFICERs, CHILDREN's SERVICES DEPARTMENT

Mr. FOURAS: I ask the Minister for Welfare: Is he aware that child care officers in the Children's Services Department have case-loads in excess of 100, whereas a case­load of 10 is considered reasonable? Will he take steps to remedy the situation by

impressing upon the Treasurer the need to appoint more child care officers to the depart­ment?

Mr. HERBERT: I am aware that some officers in the department are carrying very heavy loads. This is caused not by a failure to appoint staff but by a shortage of suitable officers.

CANCER THERAPIST NI!LAN BRYCH

Mr. MILLINER: I ask the Minister for Health: Has he received any further inform­ation or evidence from Milan Brych to satisfy him that the treatment offered by Brych is beneficial to cancer sufferers?

Dr. EDWARDS: I thought I made the position quite clear in the ministerial state­ment that I made to the House many months ago.

Mr. MILLINER: I now ask the Premier: In view of the answer given by the Minister for Health, does he still intend to invite Milan Brych to establish a cancer clinic in Queensland?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: The honour­able member knows full well my views on this matter. Time alone will resolve the situation, so if the honourable member can contain himself for a little while he might not need to worry any more.

PREMIER'S ALLEGED STATEMENT ON DISPUTE BETWEEN MINING UNIONS AND UTAH

DEVELOPMENT COMPANY

Mr. VAUGHAN: In directing a question to the Premier, I refer him to the wages agreement reached between Utah and the Combined Mining Unions and to his state­ment in "The Australian Financial Review" of 6 July 1977-

"If the companies involved in the Utah dispute did make concessions to the unions, the Government would conclude that the companies were not paying suffi­ciently high charges and levies to the Queensland Government and these charges would be raised accordingly."

I now ask: Does he still hold this view and, if so, does he intend to act accordingly?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: I have often said that people should not believe all that they read in the newspapers, particularly in "The Financial Review". I have never said what has just been quoted; I do not know where the honourable member got that statement. Did he say it was from "The Financial Review"?

Mr. Vaughan: Yes, "The Financial Review".

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: In future, the honourable member should treat what he reads there with a bit of caution.

Radioactive Substances [1 AUGUST 1978] Act Amendment Bill 1461

lWASAKI TOURIST PROJECT

Mr. HARTWIG: I ask the Premier: What impact will the Iwasaki complex have on the tourist industry in Queensland generally?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: When the whole project is well under way, it will have a tremendous impact on the tourist industry generally. I welcome the decisions in Canberra to allow the project to pro­ceed. It will have a tremendous impact on Y eppoon and the Rockhampton area as well as on industry in general. It will benefit many other sections of the tourist industrv because it will bring from all parts of the world thousands and thous­ands of people who, once they are here, will want to see other parts of the State.

I again commend Mr. Iwasaki and his company on their initiative in this area, in spite of many handicaps and a great deal of criticism and condemnation. I can never understand why the Leader of the Opposition and the A.L.P. are always negative in their approach and their attitude towards something wonderful that will pro­vide a lot of employment. They are beyond all understanding and reasoning in their attitude towards those things that are happening that will be of benefit to the people and the State generally. It is the most negative party or organisation that I have ever seen.

RADIOACTIVE SUBSTANCES ACT AMENDMENT BILL

INITIATION IN COMMITTEE

(The Chairman of Committees, Mr. W. D. Hewitt, Greenslopes, in the chair)

Hon. L. R. EDW ARDS (Ipswich­Minister for Health) (12.38 p.m.): I move­

"That a Bill be introduced to amend the Radioactive Substances Act 1958-1970 in certain particulars."

Before speaking on the contents of the Bill, I should like to briefly record the passing of one of Queensland's and the nation's greatest radiological scientists, the late former Director of the Health Department's Division of Health and Medical Physics, Mr. Keith Stevens, who, with his wife and two Health Department doctors, was tragically killed in a light plane crash in North Queensland.

This State owes a tremendous amount to the wisdom and expertise of the late Keith Stevens, who ensured that the requirements of this Act were made to work for the benefit and safety of all Queenslanders. Radioactivity is constantly associated with controversy, but Keith Stevens, with his reputation as a world­wide figure in this field, was able to advise this Government sensibly and expertly, and the efficiency of and safety standards for the use of radioactive substances in this State are a tribute to his knowledge and advice. I am sure that honourable members share my distress at the tragic loss to this State

of Keith Stevens, his wife Shirley, and two of our leading doctors, Barry Farmer, the Senior Health Officer for Queensland and Dr. Peter Goy, our Rural Health Radiologist attached to the Prince Charles Hospital.

For the information of honourable mem­bers I will now return to the contents of the Bill. International authorities such as the United Nations Commission on the Effects of Atomic Radiations and the Inter­national Commission on Radiological Pro­tection have stressed the need for limiting the exposure of the general public to the diagnostic use of X-rays to a minimum con­sistent with medical requirements.

While there can be no doubt of the essential part radiological services play in the treatment and management of patients and that the latest technological advances have extended the value of such services, nevertheless the proper use of such equip­ment depends not only on equipment stand­ards but also on the technical skill of the user to produce a satisfactory radiograph as well as an appreciation of the limitations of equipment to undertake certain studies. If the general public are to be reassured that X-rays are being undertaken with minimum exposure consistent with medical require­ments, it is also necessary for operators of X-ray units to have a basic understanding of radiation health.

The present provisions of this Act exempt medical practitioners, dentists and veterinary surgeons, and other persons acting under the supervision, instruction or request of those persons, from the necessity to hold a licence to use irradiating apparatus. I am concerned at the lack of limitation on the extent of X-ray services which can be acquired and used by persons who have had little or no training in the use of X-ray equipment and knowledge of radiation safety. Because a person is a medical practitioner, dentist or veterinary surgeon it does not automatically follow that the X-ray equipment may not be used wrongly or dangerously. I also consider that the sale of irradiating apparatus should be regulated to prevent such apparatus from coming into the possession of persons who are not qualified to use it.

This Bill therefore provides that all persons must have a licence to have in their posses­sion or to use or sell any irradiating apparatus. This amendment is aimed at protecting the persons being X-rayed and the persons operating the equipment by ensuring that only persons with an adequate know­ledge of radiographic procedure and radiation safety use irradiating apparatus. Such a requirement can only be of benefit to the community and the persons concerned. I commend the motion to the Committee.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! For the guid­ance of honourable members, I would remind them that the Act provides for the storage and use of radioactive substances. It does not refer to the mining of radioactive sub­stances.

1462 Radioactive Substances [1 Auousr 1978] Act Amendment Bill

Mr. D'ARCY (Woodridge) (12.43 p.m.): I would like to join the Opposition in the Minister's lament at the passing of Keith Stevens, who, indeed, had a world-wide reputation in the field of radioactivity and radioactive substances.

It is quite apparent from what the Minister said that this Bill is long overdue. It appears that at present people can sell and use X-ray equipment in this State with­out the Government being aware of where t~e machines actually are or of the qualifica­tiOns of the people using them. This situa­tion has obviously been allowed to continue for far too long. Only in recent years have we become aware of the implications of the use of radioactive substances on the general public. As a child I can remember being allowed to go into a shoe store or even just a general store, and put my 'root under. an. X:ray machine. Thank goodness such md1scnmmate use of these machines has been stopped in Queensland. The stage was reached when it was virtually standard practice for shoe stores to use X-ray machines.

Although we have come a fair way from that situation in the past few years there are still many hospitals in Queensl~nd at which trained people are not available to take or read X-rays. In most instances these are the smaller hospitals, and in some towns it is . ~ecessary for patients to visit private pract1~10ners. because a number of specialists m th1s particular field will not assist hos­pitals by becoming consultants. It is not pos­~ible to obtain the services of properly qual­Ified people, and services are provided to the general public without due care.

I should like to stress one point particu­larly. The Minister did not explain the situ­~tion very well, but it appears that there IS no provision for the licensing or control over the sale of equipment. Obviously such ~quipment is necessary in hospitals, but does 1t mean that unlicensed people such as chiro­practors or people associated with acupunc­tu.re, who advertise so freely in the media, will be allowed to use machines of this type? Under the Act as it stands, it appears that they would be able to do so. If the Bill does nothing more than tidy up the situation and ~nsure that only qualified people who are licensed may operate X-ray machines it ~ill do a. gr.eat service to the public, par­ticularly m mstances in which people who are not registered medical practitioners have the use of equipment of this type. As I said earlier, it is quite dangerous, and we are only now becoming aware of some of the problems associated with radioactivity.

Some people in the community are in constant need of X-rays, and the number of X-rays that they are required to have could impose a very heavy strain upon them. In some countries legislation is now being intro­duced to require people who need to have X-rays constantly to have recorded the num­ber. and types of X-rays that they have been subjected to. Perhaps the proposed Bill could be extended to cover similar situations here.

Problems could arise particularly in cases where people are suffering severely with, say, bone conditions and I remind honour­able members that the state of medical knowledge is continually changing. If people such as acupuncturists and chiropractors have been using machines of this type, cer­tainly the proposed Bill will stamp out that practice.

The Opposition commends the Bill, and it is quite obvious to me that it should have been introduced some time ago.

Mr. GUNN (Somerset) (12.49 p.m.): I cannot express too strongly my concern about the growth in the use of X-ray equip­ment throughout the country. Portable X-ray equipment is advertised quite widely, par­ticularly the Watson Victor equipment that is found in dentists' surgeries, vets' surgeries, and so on. I hope that the use of such equipment by chiropractors, naturopaths and many others who work on the fringe of medicine is not being condoned.

I should like to know what control the Department of Health has over X-ray mach­ines, particularly second-hand machines and machines that have been cast off by doctors and used, possibly experimentally, by the people to whom I have referred. In my opin­ion, that is a matter of great concern. Some of the equipment that I have seen is anti­quated, and I should like to know, as I said, what becomes of equipment that is cast off by doctors. There could be a danger of its falling into the hands of people who are not skilled in its use.

Like the honourable member for Wood­ridge I voice concern about the number of X-ray examinations that are made by skilled people, and the need for the keeping of records by them. I refer particularly to the deep X-rays that are undertaken up on Wickham Terrace. It could easily be that many patients run from doctor to doctor, with one doctor unwittingly sending them along to specialists for deep X-ray examinations not knowing that they had had them before. I have in mind barium­meal tests, barium enemas, and so on when patients are exposed to large doses of radio­active material.

I would like to know what check is kept on the the equipment of specialists. How often is their equipment checked for possible leakage? Many years ago I had some X-rays taken by Val McDowaU who had his chambers on Wickham Terrace. He had been a local doctor in my area before becoming a specialist. Indeed, he pioneered X-rays in Queensland and in fact did a lot of good work elsewhere in Australia. On that visit he told me about the dangers of X-ray equipment. Of course, the equip­ment in use today would be very different from what he was using at that time.

I hope that this amending legislation will tie up the loose ends. X-rays are dan­gerous, and most people would realise that they shou'd be used only for a specific purpose, and not indiscriminately. If the

Radioactive Substances [1 AuGUST 1978] Act Amendment Bill 1463

proposed amendments do tie up the loose ends, this piece of legislation can be of great significance. I hope that the Minister can assure us that X-rays are not used indiscriminately in hospitals or private prac­tice in Queensland.

Mr. MACKENROTH (Chatsworth) (12.53 p.m.): I am astounded that this Bill to amend the Radioactive Substances Act should be introduced. I take the Minister for Health back three months to when I raised this subject in the debate on the Cremation Act Amendment Bill. At that time the Minister told me that it would be impos­sible for radioactive substances to be in the possession of anyone unknown to the State Government. He said that the Govern­ment knew exactly where radioactive sub­stances were at all times, yet now we have amending legislation to tighten up the Act in that respect.

Dr. Edwards: Obviously you do not under­stand that there is a big difference between a radioactive substance and an X-ray machine.

i'.-Ir. MACKENROTH: There is still radio­active material there, though, isn't there?

Dr. Edwards: Oh no.

Mr. MACKENROTH: There must be otherwise it would not be covered by the Radioactive Substances Act; it would be under a different Act.

Dr. Edwards: I had better give you a lesson when I reply.

Mr. MACKENROTH: The Minister prob­ably will. Every time he replies to me he gives me a little bit of a belt, but I will keep coming back for more.

When I was speaking to the Cremation Act Amendment Bill I did raise a point about radioactive substances. I did not say that it was a large piece of uranium or anything like that. I merely said that there could be radioactive substances in a solution. At that stage the Minister said that it would be impossible for radioactive substances of any kind in Queensland to be in the hands of people that the Health Department did not know about. Quite obviously that is not true. If it were, why is this amendment to the Radioactive Substances Act before us today? This Bill is the only one that was !eft on the Business Paper at the end of the earlier sitting. Obviously the Minister did not want to discuss it at that time.

Dr. Edwards: There is an enormous dif­ference between what an X-ray tube does and what radioactive substances are. I will talk to you about that afterwards.

Mr. MACKENROTH: Good.

Mr. BERTONI (Mt. Isa) (12.54 p.m.): I rise to fully support the introduction of this Bi11. I have had numerous discus­sions about it with two sections of the

community in my area-the Nurses' Feder­ation and chiropractors. The chiropractors are concerned that this legislation will con­trol their use of X-ray machines. They are prepared to implement the Government's policy of setting up classes or schoo1s which they can attend to gain knowledge and experience in the use of X-ray machines. I hope to have the Minister's assurance that such schools and classes will be held regularly so that chiropractors can become qualified in the use of X-ray machines that they might have in their possession.

Nursing associations have raised the matter of nurses employed by private doctors attending such schools to gain experience in the use of X-ray machines in surgeries. They want to know what happens when such a nurse resigns and takes up employment with another doctor. Does she take her qualifica­tions with her, or do they apply only to her employment with the first doctor who employed her? They also want to know whether a doctor who does not immediately find a replacement nurse will be permitted to operate the X-ray machine because he is automatically accepted as being qualified to do so or whether he will be required to appoint another nurse immediately to oper­ate the machine. These matters are causing concern among nurses in my area, and I have no doubt 'that the Minister will advise me on them in due course.

I fully support the amendments; they are not before time.

Mr. DOUMANY (Kurilpa) (12.56 p.m.): I rise to support these amendments. Nowadays the use of a certain type of X-ray device is quite common in carrying out security checks, pai'ticularly at airports. One gets the feeling that they are being used rather indiscrimin­ately and perhaps without due regard to the safeguards referred to by the Minister. I would be grateful if the Minister could in­form us as to the use of such devices at airports, which are in a lot of cases Com­monwealth property. I do not know whether the use of X-ray devices at airports comes under our jurisdiction. They are being used with gay abandon, and I am certainly wor­ried about their use.

The use of microwave ovens also comes to mind. They emit radiation of very short wavelength, and whether that falls into the same category as an X-ray, I do not know. Nevertheless their use must cause concern to many honourable members. The honour­able member for Woodridge referred to the use of X-ray machines in shoe stores. That type of machine can be likened to a micro­wave oven, which is a cooking device that is marketed in large quantities at discounts. One wonders how much protection is given to the user of a microwave oven.

Finally, I want to refer to the protection of operators. Some previous speakers have raised the matter of monitoring the dosage of radiation that patients might be exposed to progressively, particularly if they are being

1464 Radioactive Substances (1 AUGUST 1978] Act Amendment Bill

treated on an ad hoc basis by a number of doctors. I mention the accumulation of radiation in operators, particularly the ad hoc operators on this fringe that the Minister is trying to do something about. I wonder whether there is any established means of monitoring their exposure to radiation.

I support the Bill.

[Sitting suspended from 1 to 2.15 p.m.]

Dr. LOCKWOOD (Toowoomba North) (2.15 p.m.): I rise to address myself to the introduction of this Bill to amend the Radioactive Substances Act. First I would mention some of the matters of which I have become aware as a member of Parlia­ment. The concern about radiation is widespread in the community. We have now reached a stage where most people understand that radiation occurs naturally from the sun, from the man-made versions of the sun, such as atomic explosions, and, of course, from radioactive elements. Man has also been able to produce radiation from the machines that we call X-ray machines.

In controlling radioactive substances, we as a Government have to consider controls on each and every one of the sources emitting radiation. We have no control over the sun. We have been advising people for a long time to take great care of their skin when in the sun because radiation from the sun is of the same nature as atomic radiation and will eventually cause damage to the skin. The skin reacts in such a way that, with advancing years, there are changes in it. We have known for a long time that certain chemicals applied to the skin can protect from the deleterious radiation effects of the sun the ordinary person who goes about his duties in the sunshine, the sportsman or the person who is sunbaking.

Just as we can put a shield between the radiation emitted by the sun and the tissue which is affected-namely, the skin­so we have to be sure that, when radiation sources are set up, as much shielding as possible is put between that source and the persons who are using it. For a long time now Governments have been aware of the dangers of the old X-ray machines that were used to check on the spacing between the toes of one's foot. That has been raised in this debate, although I do not think those who mentioned it realised the significance of it. The real danger was not so much to the children who perhaps playfully put their feet under it, but to the person who operated the machine year in and year out and who received the ever­accumulating dose of radiation. It was not the person who put his foot under the machine, but the person who used it who was at risk. It is for us as a Government to make sure that those people who con­stantly use X-ray machines such as those for checking baggage are afforded the same protection as those who do routine X-rays in

doctors' surgeries, departments of radiology and so on. Although it must be admitted that modern X-ray machines used to scan baggage and parcels use a feature known as image intensification, those who will be operating them in the course of their work will be exposed for a considerably longer period than a person who goes to a hospital or a doctor's surgery for X-ray diagnosis.

There is a need to have all persons who come into contact with X-rays afforded full protection. The best means of doing this is to have them wear a disc with a film in it which can be developed to check on the X-ray exposure on that film. All persons who are licensed to operate radia­ting machines of any type must wear this film, whiah I think should also incorporate the licence to operate the machine. The disc should also show that such and such a person is licensed to operate an X-ray machine and it should show the period for which he is licensed. In this way, every patient who comes for X-ray knows that the person operating the machine is fully competent to operate it, and this will be in fact an on-the-spot, ipso facto Government inspector.

Why should this be so? It has been found in a great many places where there are not such stringent controls that X-rays can be pointed through a patient onto a film. How­ever, X-rays can bounce or go past either side of the patient or, indeed, through thick walls into waiting rooms. Just as light can be reflected by mirrors and bounce around a room, X-rays can bounce and hit people who are thought to be shielded and protected.

Why should we take care? For a long time -from the early days-radiographers used to check the exposure of films by placing a hand in front of an X-ray machine and judging the exposure by looking at the emitted visible light. These people were sub­jected to an incredibly high incidence of cancer in the hand that was put in front of the machine. In our major hospitals we have seen a great deal of deformity in babies and the still birth of babies owing to insuffi­cient protection of people operating X-ray machines. This applies particularly to males whose gonads are lightly protected. They can be hit by X-rays. They, the germ cells, are the most rapidly degenerating tissues in the body and they can be severely affected. This also applies to females. However, as the ovaries are deeper in the pelvis, they are less likely to be severely affected. But I think it is time that this Parliament-indeed our whole society-took note of one par­ticular thing: jobs that have particular health hazards-radiation is one, but there is also asbestosis and many others-known to have deleterious effects, should be reserved for people who are past the child-bearing age. This applies particularly to radiation. Radio­graphers should be people who are finished with bearing children, on the basis that persons doing that work might have child­ren with severe defects or suffer the mis­fortune of their children being stillborn.

Radioactive Substances [1 AUGUST 1978] Act Amendment Bill 1465

There are a great many industrial uses to which radiation is put today. Many people are using radiation away from the medical scene. They need to be particularly alerted to its dangers. The dangers of any use of radiation are immense because radiation in the industrial setting is not light and quite often it is not calibrated as carefully as radiation is in the medical scene. It often uses radioactive elements which transmit pure radiation as a breakdown of radioactive and unstable isotopes. In places where these types of radiation are used, there needs to be absolute protection with lead baffling to make sure that the person involved has pro­tection against radiation by exposure to radioactive elements, for example, when checking on a weld to see that it has taken properly. These precautions have to be very rigidly enforced. The Government cannot take sufficient action to protect workers who are using these appliances. Everybody who comes within the ambit of radioactive sub­stances used in industry must realise the full dangers and they must, of course, be checked regularly.

Earlier this year, this Parliament amended an Act to require medical practitioners to sign a Form C for the cremation of a human body. We did that to make sure that radio­c.ctive implants were not in the body of the deceased at the time of cremation.

I think that this Bill illustrates once again a recognition of our responsibility to the people of Queensland and I think it also illustrates our desire to see that people are protected. It further illustrates that this Government is prepared to carry out an audit of radioactive substances used in this State so that it can keep track of every last radioactive substance or radioactive implant so that none are lost and all can always be accounted for. I think that this needs to be done urgently.

Of course, I realise that some of the radioactive substances that are used have a shorter life span so that in four or five days there is only half of what was started with and in another four or five days the radioactivity is lost. Some of the other radioactive substances, of course, have a much longer life span and they have to be more rigidly controlled, so there is a need to take the step that the Government has taken today in introducing this Bill.

We are aware that the people who operate X-ray machines must have a certain amount of skill, which must be established and maintained by the Government. This pro­posal is not without merit. There is also a need to know exactly where these mach­ines are at all times.

I should like now to cite some com­plaints from my constituents which high­light this problem. There was the case of a person who went to an office in Toowoomba and posed for what he thought was an X-ray. In other words, he went before some machinery and after some

hocus-pocus the operator of the machine took the film into the dark room and later emerged holding an X-ray picture depict­ing a very bent spine. However, from the description of another constituent of mine, it would seem that the very same film was shown to him. It, too, showed a very bent spine. Both constituents were able to say quite definitely that the film appeared to be old and faded so I suspect that the same film had been used in that way on many occasions. It did not have a name on it. Of course, if it had had a name imprinted on it when it was first used, it would have had that name on it for all time. Therefore, I feel that there is a need for this Government to insist that all X-rays have on them the name, age, and address of the person who was X-rayed. It is my contention that if any person is shown an X-ray film purported to be of him but not having his name on it, that should be an offence in this State. If some hospitals or doctors do not have the facilities for printing the name on the film, the film should be immediately marked with that patient's name in such a manner that it can never be removed.

I believe that the operator of the machine told a monstrous lie in stating that the film was that of the person who was before him and that he then set about initiating a course of treatment that was wholly unnecessary because the spine depicted in the film did not belong to the particular patient. It was used in this instance to show that this person could commence treatment to have his spine straightened by manipulation which was another falsehood.

I believe that there is a need not only to register machines and register the operators of them, but also to make these people accountable for all films used and to ensure that they include the name, address and age of the patient. If this cannot be done, this Government will have to insist that every X-ray film supplied have some identification such as a serial number on it and also insist that all films be accounted for by a Government audit of some kind. That would be an unwarranted expense to impose on persons who legit­imately take X-rays. However, the person who is having an X-ray taken will be his own auditor if he is given half the chance. If this requirement is made compulsory, those charlatans who operate X-ray mach­ines will be forced out of business. They will either have to take films and show patients the genuine ones or they will be caught, and caught first up. I dare say if this requirement is imposed upon them t~e practice will cease forthwith, and that will be a good thing for the people of Queensland.

I think the Government is to be corn­mended for taking the trouble of planning to bring nurses and other persons who use X-ray equipment to the Royal Brisbane Hospital for training. In a training course

1466 Radioactive Substances (1 AUGUST 1978] Act Amendment Bill

of two weeks' duration they can become proficient in the use of X-ray machines and can learn something of the safety procedures they owe it to themselves and to their patients to follow.

Perhaps another thing the Government could look into is the recording on every packet of X-rays of the number of exposures in it so that persons could take note of the number of their particular exposures. If it is a simple thing like treating a frac­tured wrist, there might be only four, five or six exposures and so the patient will receive only a minimal exposure, but people with chronic gut and kidney problems go through repeated X-rays. It would be worth while if, after every series of X-rays, they were told the actual radiation dose they had received and some attempt made to keep a record of their accumulated dose. This may raise a few problems, but I think they can be conveniently overcome.

I think people need to be rather better informed than at present of the dose of radiation they receive while sunbaking, for example. Even lying on the sand at Surfers Paradise after dark exposes a person to radiation. We need to know, for example, the difference between the radiation from a wrist watch and various medical pro­cedures and what one can expect from such things as a train carrying yellow-cake passing by. I think the sooner people have all these tables at their fingertips the sooner we will hear some real debate about radiation and its dangers. But I must say I congratulate the Minister on taking the step of introducing this Bill today because I think it will mean a great deal of added safety to the com­munity.

The CHAIRMAN: Order! I have been advised that we are facing some technical problems with the microphones and I would ask honourable members to co-operate by refraining from making extraneous noise and I would be pleased if when addressing them­selves to the Bill they would speak as loudly as possible.

Dr. SCOTT-YOUNG (Townsville) (2.33 p.m.): I will be as loud as possible and as short as possible. This Bill does not appear to be very long, but it is of extreme import­ance-so important that I am a bit worried that the feeling instilled in people by it may be one of fear. Radiology has been one of the greatest medical advances of the century. Ever since Madame Curie dis­covered radium and the mechanism and physics of radioactive materials, we have uncovered a great diagnostic vein. We now have a way of diagnosing malignant tumours of the bowel long before they show any clinical signs. We have means of diagnosing malignant tumours of the brain long before they do irreparable damage and we also have ways and means of diagnosing malignant tumours of the lung before they show any clinical signs. So radiology has come to stay. It has been continually upgraded and the techniques are continually being refined.

This is a very good Bill but it perhaps does not go far enough. I would be inclined to impose even greater restrictions on people using these machines. I am all for greater training facilities for people using this tech­nical apparatus taking X-ray films. I hope that the talk of radioactivity and the prob­lems associated with X-rays are not instilling an atmosphere of fear into this debate, because diagnosis by X-ray carried out correctly is of immense assistance and immense importance to the human race.

In his introductory speech, the Minister said, "I also consider that the sales of irradiating apparatus should be regulated to prevent such apparatus from coming into the possession of persons who are not qualified to use it." Unfortunately this has been the case in 'the past. Technicians have not been very well trained, and in some instanc~ people without any training could go and buy X-ray apparatus and use it as we have seen it used in several other States in this country. Shoe store assistants used to X-ray people's feet and say, "Yes, that size shoe will fit you.", and this had disastrous results to the operator of the machine, who was constantly being irradiated. If he were young, with growing bones, he might well suffer damage to his bone centres. A similar situa­tion arose with chiropractors who X-ray spines.

It requires a considerable amount of radiation to get a good picture, and some of the pictures are shocking. Some of them are under-radiated and some over-radiated. The number of hopeless films that I have had given to me is amazing. People say, "I have been to see Mr. So-and-so, a chiropractor, and he X-rayed my spine and it showed that vertebra No. 2 is out." When you look at the X-ray film, you cannot see vertebra No. 2 because of the fog and smudge on the poorly taken film. You then have to send that patient to a qualified radiologist and have him submitted again to something like two roentgen units, and all this is cumulative.

The chiropractors do not carry the sensi­tivity discs, so they, too, will be getting X-radiation and will be suffering damage. These rays do not damage only the skin. Our early radiologists used to end up with carcinomas of the fingers and their nails fell off. They also affect the genital system, and people can produce monsters or become barren. It can also affect the blood-forming centres, and people can get leukaemia. In Townsville one of our radiology technicians developed leukaemia and it proved fatal. It can also affect the eyes and cause cataracts. Those are some of the common conditions, which shows how essential it is that the technicians be screened and checked. This is carried out by using a little sensitivity disc on the body, which can then be checked every week or every month by the Queensland Radium Institute. It should be compulsory for it to be worn at all times. I went into the X-ray Department at the Townsville General Hospital recently and saw a young

Radioactive Substances [1 AUGUST 1978] Act Amendment Bill 1467

lady doing an X-ray-a very skilful X-ray; I had a look at the quality and it was excellent-but she did not have a radiation sensitivity disc on her. I repeat that it should be compulsory to wear it at all times and it should be checked every fortnight or every month-wha:tever period is decided upon­to see how much radiation has occurred.

The other ,thing that worries me is that there does not seem to be as much control and care taken with industrial machinery as is taken in the hospitals, and I think that the Minister probably has his sights set on the control of industrial use of X-rays to detect fatigue in metals, and so on, where the technicians are not well trained and the risk of irradiation effect to themselves is higher. I commend the Minister for his attitude in ,that respect.

The Minister also said in his speech "have a licence to have in their possession or to use or to sell irradiating apparatus". This is essential. In using apparatus such as this, which is lethal-it may not be lethal immedi­ately, but it is lethal-and is dangerous, we should have very strict control of the quality of the machines. We have some funny things and funny people in medicine, and we have had some shocking machines foisted on us. For example, at the Townsville Gen­eral Hospital we had a machine and a Geiger counter indicated that there was radiation everywhere. Mr. Keith Stevens, who was mentioned earlier, was at that stage a phy­sicist, but he was also an extremely good technician. He pulled the machine apart and found out where the fault was.

The loss of Mr. Stevens to this country has been a great one. It is essential that we train our technicians skilfully, even if we have to give them academic years off, as other academics get, to go to other parts of the world to study and keep abreast of advances.

I do not think we have the necessary careful surveillance of these industrial machines as we have with the X-ray machines in our hospitals. I feel that the Bill will bring this about, and I congratulate the Minister for bringing it down.

Mr. BOURKE (Lockyer) (2.41 p.m.): I rise to speak in support of this Bill which will further and complete the aims of the original Act that was framed and passed in the interests of the public safety.

I join with the Minister for Health in expressing regret and sympathy on the death of Mr. Kevin Stevens. The expertise and competence of men such as Mr. Stevens are assets that cannot be lightly lost to the community. These qualities are the result of long dedication and application super­imposed on original high and natural ability.

It is an unfortunate fact that all matters concerning radioactivity or nuclear fission have assumed emotional overtones in the community. We see this in the debate on nuclear matters, where emphasis is placed

on the horrific use of nuclear power in war. Hiroshima is unduly emphasised. I regard Hiroshima as a true tragedy of war, like the bombing of Dresden, the fire-bomb­ing of Tokyo or even the rape of Nan­king, rather than a nuclear tragedy as such. In the debate on nuclear power emphasis is placed on its possible terrorist use rather than on its positive beneficial possibilities. This emphasis on the negative side of nuclear development has clouded the humanitarian advances made in the use of nuclear principles in medicine. Recently we saw the opening of Block 7 at the Royal Brisbane Hospital, with provision for the extended use of nuclear medicine.

The use of community screening with X-rays has brought about the passing of tuberculosis from its previous position as a community scourge. At Lucas Heights, for example, radiation is useful for the sterili­sation of medical instruments such as plastic disposable syringes.

Many of the early researchers showed carelessness in their handling of the material. It was only as the effects of such handling became obvious that steps were taken to restrict the exposure of human beings to radioactivity. In the early days, radio­activity was something of a sideshow attrac­tion. Since then we have seen the setting of scientific exposure limits, and steps have been taken to limit the exposure of persons to radiation.

A problem has been the great attraction that scientific developments have for quacks. It is a great travesty that developments made possible by people of genius and inspiration, such as the Curies, have often been exploited by people who are their very antithesis and who seek only to exploit the public. I have read a recent report of a person who has achieved some notoriety as one who can cure cancer engaging in activities in New Zealand in which he used a copying machine that was purported to be a radioactive device that diagnosed cancer. That is one aspect of his activities that has not received the publicity that should have been given to it, and it was one of the more obvious ploys that he used in the early days of his career before he managed to gain the support of political people of high standing in this State.

Professional radiologists are of high pro­fessional standing. This Bill will provide an exemption for doctors, dentists and veterin­ary surgeons, who quite obviously would not have the same training as radiologists in the narrow aspects of radioactivity but who nevertheless have sufficient training to enable them to use equipment without putting the patient in any danger. And surely Gov­ernment's first responsibility is the protection and safety of the public.

This amendment to the Act will bring about a most effective means of controlling the use of certain machines. It will ensure that they are not misused. Furthermore, it will control the ownership and possession of

1468 Radioactive Substances [1 AUGUST 1978] Act Amendment Bill

them. The regulations under the Act will be simpler for the Government to supervise, and on that basis I commend the Minister on the introduction of the Bill.

Hon. L. R. EDWARDS (Ipswich-Min­ister for Health) (2.47 p.m.), in reply: I com­mend those members who have spoken to these amendments. From the comments that have been made I feel that the Bill will be supported strongly by both Government and Opposition members. I want to refer briefly to some of the comments that have been made by those members who have spoken.

Firstly, the honourable member for Wood­ridge expressed sympathy to the Stevens family, as did the honourable member for Townsville and the honourable member for Lockyer. I am quite sure that these express­ions of sympathy will be passed on to the family.

The honourable member for Woodridge mentioned the use of X-ray machines by chiropractors and others. This is a very diffi­cult area and one that would be almost impossible to control unless there was a register of X-rays. This would not be pos­sible; the cost would be prohibitive and the value would be absolutely limited. I do not think there is any value in his suggestion, but I appreciate his support for the Bill.

The honourable member Somerset men­tioned fringe practitioners and the control of antiquated equipment. Under the Bill it is necessary for those who own equipment to notify us when they are disposing of it. Our Division of Health and Medical Physics has the power to inspect such X-ray apparatus.

Mr. Gunn: Can you dismantle it?

Dr. EDW ARDS: We can carry out certain tests to make sure that it is safe to use.

The honourable member also mentioned the indiscriminate use of X-rays. We are very much aware of this. I have had dis­cussions on a number of occasions with the medical profession, and I know that the profession is well aware of the fact that X-rays are being used indiscriminately by certain doctors.

The honourable member for Chatsworth seems to take exception to my giving him a belt, as he described it. That is not so at all; nevertheless it is obvious that he does not know the difference between a radio­active substance and an X-ray machine. But rather than talk about it in this context, I invite him to inspect our Division of Health and Medical Physics to see what is going on. For that matter, I invite any honourable member who wishes to make a visit to do so. I would be only too pleased to arrange it. This division was set up by the late Keith Stevens and it is recognised throughout Aus­tralia as one of the most outstanding div­isions in this very important field.

As I say, I would be only too pleased to arrange an inspection by the honourable member for Chatsworth, because obviously

he is well out in his information concerning X-ray machines and he has indicated his ignorance of the subject.

Radioactive substances undergo what we term nuclear disintegration and in so doing may emit one or more types of ionising radiation. A radioactive substance undergoes decay in an expotential manner and its radiation will be present to some degree as long as some radioactive material remains. On the other hand, X-rays, of course, are man-made and electrically generated. They are generated when a stream of electrons is accelerated through a very high voltage atomic member and strikes a high-density target material. They will only be generated while current flows through the X-ray tube. There is a very great difference between radioactive substances and X-rays.

I hope therefore that the honourable member will avail himself of our offer to visit this division. I will arrange it for him if he lets me know. In that way we will be able to inform him of this very important matter. Some Government mem­bers as well could avail themselves of the advice available in this expert area. Obviously it is important that members should make themselves aware of the type of facilities that are available.

The honourable member for Mt. Isa men­tioned the use of X-ray machines by chiro­practors, who can apply for a certificate to operate them. A certificate will not be issued unless they have adequate qualifications to operate X-ray machines.

The honourable member for Kurilpa men­tioned the matter of security checks at air­ports-particularly overseas airports--where X-rays are used for luggage checks. These machines are very well protected and it is not possible for people to come in con­tact with radiation leakage. I am informed that people are not permitted in the area when radiation is passing through. As well, the X-rays used in security lounges and so forth are of very low density and do not cause any problems.

He also mentioned the matter of micro­wave ovens. I checked this during the luncheon adjournment. I am advised that, compared with X-rays, microwave ovens have a very long wavelength-almost to the other end of the spectrum. Their wavelength varies between one millimetre and several centimetres. Those used in microwave ovens at an operating frequency of 2,450 mega­hertz have a wavelength of 12.2 centimetres. Their energy is not sufficient to cause ioni­sation at all, and the only biological effect is caused by molecular vibration. There is no danger of radiation from microwave ovens.

The honourab1e member for Toowoomba North spoke at length, and quite expertly, on the effects of radiation on the skin and so forth. He also commented on the neces­sity for marking X-ray film. This is not a problem in hospitals, as I am sure the honourable member would be aware, or in

Explosives Act [l AuGusT 1978] Amendment Bill 1469

private practice. If the honour~ble. member does know of areas where this IS occur­ing in private practice, we would be very pleased to have the matter investigated.

The honourable member for Townsville paid tribute to Mr .. stevens and sp?ke from his practical expener:ce as supermtend~nt of the Townsville hospital over a long penod of time. He had very close association with Mr. Stevens and I am sure that those of us who knew him share his feelings.

The honourable member spoke expertly on the history of radiation and mentioned the need for greater training. We support that view. The Government has fully spon­sored increasing training programmes. The late Mr. Stevens, at the Division of Health and Medical Physics, undertook courses for in-service training. We have groups in our division who constantly travel throughout the State. Nurdon Serico, who is a technician in that department, is often seen in country areas especially giving advice to technicians, nursing superintendents and doctors on the use of radiation equipment within our hos­pitals. The other day when I was in Gladstone with the honourable member for Port Curtis, Mr. Serico was checking the X-ray department. I have often seen him in the country. The previous time was at Normanton some months ago. So there are these officers who tour the whole of the State checking equipment and training pro­grammes.

The honourable member for Lockyer sup­ported the amendment and also paid tribute to Mr. Keith Stevens. He mentioned the very important fact that the responsibility of the Government is to try to protect the community as best it can. We believe that the legislation will in fact do this. I am very p1eased that members have supported the legislation before the Parliament.

Motion (Dr. Edwards) agreed to.

Resolution reported.

FIRST READING

Bill presented and, on motion of Dr. Edwards, read a first time.

EXPLOSIVES ACT AMENDMENT BILL

INITIATION

Hon. R. E. CAMM (Whitsundav-Minis­ter for Mines, Energy and Police), ·by leave, without notice: I move-

"That the House will, at its present sitting, resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider introducing a Bill to amend the Explosives Act 1952-1975 in certain particulars."

Motion agreed to.

INITIATION IN COMMITTEE

(Mr. Gunn, Somerset, in the chair)

Hon. R. E. CAMM (Whitsunday-Minis­ter for Mines, Energy and Police) (2.57 p.m.): I move-

"That a Bill be introduced to amend the Explosives Act 1952-1975 in certain par­ticulars."

In introducing this Bill, I would like to explain to members that its purpose is to provide a simplified procedure which will allow certain groups of persons to obtain and use explosives in the course of their occupation and to provide for the manu­facture of a particular type of explosive having a simple formulation at places other than a factory as presently defined by the Act.

The previous Act provides that all persons using explosives shall hold a shot-firer's licence or a shot-firer's (restricted) licence unless exempted under certain provisions of the Mines Regulation Act 1964-1968, the Coal Mining Act 1925-1976 or the Petroleum Act 1923-1976.

A new section provides for the issue of a permit by the Chief Inspector of Explosives or a member of the Queensland Police Force authorised by the Chief Inspector of Explos­ives. The holder of such permit would also be exempted from the requirements to hold a shot-firer's licence or a shot-firer's (restricted) licence.

A permit may be issued to a particular person, subject to specified terms, conditions or restrictions and could relate to such matters as the use, purchase, storage or carriage of explosives.

The manufacture of explosives is pro­vided for under the Act but only at a licensed factory. Provision is now being made for the manufacture of certain specified explosives at a prescribed place other than a factory. This relates to the explosive known as An-Fo which is simply prepared and used widely by the mining and other industries.

It is proposed also to extend the scope contained in the section giving power to make regulations to encompass matters concerning the issue of permits, including fees related thereto.

I consider the amendments necessary to improve the laws governing the use of explosives.

I should explain that An-Fo is ammonium nitrate mixed with fuel oil. It is a simple explosive that is used by many people, especially in the mining industry, and also now by farmers to clear their land.

Mr. VAUGHAN (Nudgee) (3 p.m.): I have listened very carefully to the Minister's intro­duction of this Bill and I must say at the outset that I am concerned at any action taken from time to time to allow easier access to explosives. I think that I appreciate

1470 Explosives Act [1 AUGUST 1978] Amendment Bill

what the Minister is alluding to in respect of the proposed amendments, particularly the use of An-Fo in the mining industry. How­ever, I am concerned about the new section and I will be very interested to study the contents of the Bill in this area.

The new section relates to exemptions in respect of the issue of permits, particularly where the permits are going to be issued by a member of the Police Force. I can recall that for many years, while I was an official of the Electrical Trades Union, one of the big problems that we were confronted with as we moved around the State was the lack of supervision of the provisions of the Explosives Act. Many cases came to our notice quite regularly of any Tom, Dick or Harry being handed explosives by his employer and required to use them. We also encountered problems in the carriage, trans­port and storage of explosives. I well remem­ber the practice that obtained at the S.E.A.Q. depot at Gympie where explosives were actually kept in the main storeroom without any real thought being given to what might happen to them or any surveillence of them. We encountered instances of explosives being carried in vehicles without any warning signs on the vehicles and even of men driving the vehicles being unaware that they were carrying explosives. In some instances detona­tors were carried in the cabin of the truck, with the explosives on the seat.

It is all very well to introduce amendments to an Act, but one of the things that con­cerns me and the Opposition is that when new provisions are implemented there should also be ample provision for the policing of those particular provisions and all the other provisions of the Act.

One other matter that I looked into while I was an official of the union was the actual use of explosives. I believe that there is an urgent need for specific training, with train­ing procedure being laid down, of persons who are required to work with the various types of explosives that are in general use or are available today.

The . Electrical Industry Safety Advisory Committee was established in 1964 and over a number of years it looked into the use carriage and storage of explosives, particu: larly the use of explosives, and it was instru­mental in setting up a course and training scheme at the Linesmen's Training School at Rocklea, which is now run by S.E.Q.E.B. for S.E.C.Q. At this school persons who are required to use explosives are given training in all aspects of the handling, care and use of them.

Those are some of the reasons why I am a little bit concerned and why I will be waiting to look at the proposed amendment so far as it relates to giving exemption to ~ertai1_1 pe<?pl~. In this day and age, with Its h!gh mc1d7nce of crime, particularly breakmg, entermg and stealing, we have to ·be very careful in approving legislation cover­ing explosives. When we are looking at

amendments to the Explosives Act, we should also look for better ways and means of policing the Act as a whole.

In regard to the manufacture of explosives, as I said earlier, I can appreciate what the Minister has said about the use of An-Fo. Apparently it is used in the coal-mining industry, particularly in open-cut mines, and possibly the reference there to manufacture means the actual preparation by men on the field where blasting is to take place.

I reiterate that in considering any amend­ments to the Explosives Act to make it easier for people to obtain explosives and use them, we should be displaying genuine concern about the training of these people and acting to bring it about. I reserve fur­ther comments until the Bill is printed and I am able to study its provisions.

Mr. SIMPSON (Cooroora) (3.5 p.m.): I rise to support the Minister in his move to set up a workable arrangement in rela­tion to the sale and use of explosives in this State. Some of these explosives are used by farmers in the clearing of their land and have thus played an essential part in bringing certain areas of land into economic production. In a lot of cases it would not have been possible to establish a viable industry without the use of explosives. These people have developed a high degree of expertise in the use of explosives, especially nitroprill, which they mix with distillate to increase its potency.

Then we found the ridiculous condition that primary producers with this expertise were required to have a shot-firer's licence. Some of these people had been working safely with explosives for 30 or 40 years, and even training others, and yet they were being told that they had to sit for a licence before they could continue to use this means of removing stumps, stones, roots and other obstructions from their properties. So I welcome this move whereby primary producers can in fact carry on this essential part of the development of their properties.

Quite often primary producers have to wait for the right weather conditions before they can do certain work on their pro­perties, especially if they are working in conjunction with earthmoving equipment, which can often be more economically used if the larger stumps are loosened or removed with explosives. If this is done, quite often lighter earthmoving equipment can be used to do the job.

People conducting logging operations in a lot of our high rainfall country often cut the timber off at ground level, which makes it virtually impossible for bulldozers to get in and remove the stumps. In fact, explosives are the only economical way to handle this problem. I think it is important that we reaise the significance of allowing the proper and legitimate use of explosives by those who have been using them over a period of years, in this case primary producers.

Explosives Act [1 AUGUST 1978] Amendment Bill 1471

But we must also take steps to prevent the illegal use of explosives by criminals, people who break into establishments and steal explosives in order to use them in some criminal activity. We can help to combat this sort of activity by issuing permits. I believe that we can introduce better control of the supply of explosives than we have at the moment by keeping a record of the people who purchase explosives. If we had some system whereby people would have to show some sort of identification such as a driver's licence, this would show that the person who pur­chased the explosives was in fact the person whose name was written in the record book. I think this would be a big help because we could then trace all known sources of explosives at any time. This is important because often we hear of people who have had explosives removed from their properties without their being aware of it.

The people using it must be responsible, and there must be a record of the explosives that are taken from the various places where they are sold. I am pleased to hear that primary producers will be able to obtain a permit at any police station. That is a good idea as long as permits are readily available and the charge for them is reason­able. They should also be for a reasonable period-say, six months.

I welcome the approach that the Minister has made to the problem.

Mr. BOOTH (Warwick) (3.11 p.m.): I support the introduction of the Bill. For some time the clearing of arable land has been delayed to some extent because people who had the know-how and were accustomed to using explosives were unable to get a shot-firer's licence without going to the trouble of doing the course, which takes a great deal of time. The Minister is attempting to simplify the procedure and update it, and allowing police stations to issue permits will do a great service to people who normally use explosives.

Arguments have been put forward that somewhere along the line this proposal will have an adverse effect on safety. However, I do not think it is likely that a person who has not had any experience with explosives will be issued with a permit, and I believe that that in itself is a safeguard.

As mentioned by the honourable member for Cooroora, the permit will be issued for a restricted period. He suggested that it should be at least six months, and I think that is fair and reasonable. If a person who is engaged in primary industry wishes to do something on his property, he may not be aware of the exact date on which he wishes to do it. He needs a permit that will give him some degree of flexibility, and he may be able to extend it over a period.

It might be argued that this is a back­ward step, but I believe it is merely simplify­ing the procedure. There is an o1d saying that honest people are the only ones who are caught by regulations, and it may be that a number of people who wished to use this material used it in spite of the regu­lations. Because they had to obtain a shot-firer's licence, they probably found some way of evading the regulations. The proposed Bill will make possible new regu­lations and a new and sensible procedure. People will be able to get a permit and do the clearing that they wish to do with­out having to dodge the regulations.

I do not think that the regulations will be as open-ended as was suggested by the honourable member for Nudgee, because permits will relate to the use, purchase, car­riage and storage of explosives, and matters of a similar nature. Some restrictions will be placed on the holder of a permit, and although I hope that they will not be too restrictive, I hope that they will be suf­ficiently restrictive to cover the cases men­tioned by the honourable gentleman.

An Opposition Member interjected.

Mr. BOOTH: I am not speaking about liquid gas; I am speaking particularly about the use of explosives by people clearing land or carrying out similar procedures. There must be special provisions to cover these procedures, because it is quite obvious that for the last six to 12 months many people have been annoyed because they have been unable to get a shot-firer's licence with­out undertaking a course and have, there­fore, been forced to abandon their ideas of clearing a few stones or rocks from their properties. Many of them have postponed that work, waiting for the proposed Bill.

I commend the Minister for introducing the Bill. In my opinion, it will have adequate safety provisions built into it. Because per­mits will be issued at police stations, it will be reasonably easy for a person to obtain a permit. He will not have to go to very much trouble.

Mr. I • .T. GIBBS (Albert) (3.14 p.m.): I commend the Minister for introducing this Bill to deal with shot-firers' licences. It will do two things: basically, it will allow the person who wishes to do some clearing on a property, and perhaps do some blowing in a minor way, to obtain a permit; it will also overcome the problem relating to the responsibility that storekeepers have had in issuing explosives to people and just get­ting them to sign their name in a book. On occasions explosives have been pur­chased in other persons' names. Someone will say, "I am getting this for Bill Smith", or, "Joe Blow", when that is not the case. This reflects back on the storekeeper who has kept explosives for the convenience of customers.

It has been said that we can look after honest people only. Dishonest people will possibly always be able to obtain explosives,

1472 Explosives Act Amendment Bill [1 AuGUST 1978] Mines Regulation Act, &c., Bill

if they so desire, on the black market or through the back door, or by stealing them from a magazine. Perhaps the Bill will tighten up control generally. I know that small miners use a lot of explosives. If they want to use explosives on a continual basis, they can get a full-time shot-firer's licence which gives them the right to buy explosives at any time they desire as long as they store them in a suitable place.

All sorts of other aspects come into this, apart from the use of gelignite. Nitro explosives are used in great quantities these days. They are more dangerous than many people realise. Quite a few accidents have occurred with them because of neglect or careless use.

I congratulate the Minister for easing conditions for the issue of a shot-firer's licence to those who wish to use explosives in a minor way. At the same time the Bill will protect the storekeeper. Perhaps it will stop dishonest people from having easy access to explosives for other than legitimate purposes.

Hon. R. E. CAMM (Whitsunday-Minis­ter for Mines, Energy and Police) (3.18 p.m.), in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions. The honourable member for Nudgee indicated that he was concerned about the ease with which explos­ives can be obtained. I know that the explosives I mentioned can be readily obtained in the form of fertiliser. When that is mixed with dieseline, which is used on the farm, it becomes a very powerful explosive. I know that when someone needs a long-burning fuse he can wrap some Condy's crystals in a handkerchief and pour glycerine on it. When the glycerine comes in contact with the Condy's crystals there is a minor explosion. No-one could say that we should prohibit the sale of glycerine or Condy's crystals. It is just the same with the explosive I mentioned. Ammonium nitrate has been used extensively for many years in the farming community.

The necessity for this amendment arose out of the need to issue shot-firer's licences. It was agreed by the mines inspectors and those in charge of administering the Act at that time, even though it was controlled by the Health Department, that the responsibility for the administration should be taken by officers of the Mines Depart­ment. It was difficult for people who were not employed as shot-firers as their means of livelihood to obtain a licence if they wished to use explosives on very rare occasions when clearing land or to do some minor excavation work on their property. A record will be kept of the issuing of a permit, and that record will indicate how long the permit will be in operation and the name of the persons using explosives. An overall check will be kept on the people who have these permits. The permits will be issued by the Chief Inspector of Explosives or by the Police Department, authorised by the chief inspector.

The honourable member for Cooroora supports the Bill. He has had practical experience of the difficulties confronting people who wish to obtain shot-firers' licences. The exam that they sit for is not a difficult one; it is just the incon­venience of having to sit for an exam to obtain a licence that might be necessary on only a few occasions in farming or land-clearing of a minor nature.

The honourable member for Warwick agrees that it is desirable to have a system of permits. There will be a small charge for these permits, but that charge will relate only to the actual cost of administer­ing the issue of permits and the necessary paperwork.

The honourable member for Albert con­siders it desirable not only in farming but also in land-clearing and other activities in which the use of explosives is necessary. I am pleased that Opposition members as well as Government members support the proposals, and I commend the Bill to the Committee.

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

FIRST READING

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

MINES REGULATION ACT AMENDMENT BILL

INITIATION

Hon. R. E. CAMM (Whitsunday-Min­ister for Mines, Energy and Police), by leave, without notice: I move-

"That the House will, at its present sitting, resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider introducing a Bill to amend the Mines Regulation Act 1964-1978 in certain particulars." Motion agreed to.

INITIATION IN COMMITTEE

(Mr. Gunn, Somerset, in the chair)

Hon. R. E. CAMM (Whitsunday-Min­ister for Mines, Energy and Police) (3.23 p.m.): I move-

"That a Bill be introduced to amend the Mines Regulation Act 1964-1978 in certain particulars."

The proposed Bill is a brief one but is considered most important.

The purpose of the Bill is to give general effect to the findings of the Kianga mine disaster inquiry following on the appointment of a Chief Research Engineer, State Mining Engineer's Section, with a view to attaining satisfactory safety practices in the various mines throughout the State.

Mines Regulation Act, &c., Bill [1 AUGUST 1978] Miners' Homestead Leases, &c., Bill1473

To allow for overall supervision and co-ordination of various groups within the department it is necessary to amend the Mines Regulation Act to provide that the chairman of the board of examiners be the State Mining Engineer and not the Chief Inspector of Mines as at present.

The State Mining Engineer is also Chief 1nspector of Mines, and the Assistant State Yiining Engineer is also Assistant Chief Inspector of Mines. The position of Assistant State Mining Engineer and Assistant Chief Inspector of Mines will be re-designated Chief Inspector of Mines and this will place the State Mining Engineer in charge of all the various groups within the department dealing with safety in mines, both metalli­ferous and coal.

The present Act provides that the Chief Inspector of Mines is the chairman of the Board of Examiners and the proposed amend­ment provides that the chairman of the Board of Examiners shall be the person holding the office of State Mining Engineer.

I consider the amendment is necessary for the effective administration of the safety regulations affecting the various mines.

Mr. VA.UGHAN (Nudgee) (3.26 p.m.): From what the Minister has said, we can see no objection to the proposed amendment. However, we do say this. It is quite some years since the Kianga mine disaster and quite some years since the Kianga mine disaster inquiry was set up. We are aware that many recommendations were made by that inquiry. The Opposition feels that not enough has been done about implementing the findings of that inquiry. We call on the Government to implement the inquiry's find­ings in the interests of safety in the coal­mining industry. I will reserve any further comments on the proposed amendments until the second-reading stage.

Hon. R. E. CAMM (Whitsunday-Minister for Mines, Energy and Police) (3.27 p.m.), in reply: The concern expressed about the implementation of the recommendations of the committee that inquired into the Kianga mine disaster is not soundly based. All recommendations of the committee are being examined. Many of them have been imple­mented by the Mines Department. Even though this amendment designates the pos­ition of Chief Research Engineer, it does not follow that there has been any neglect what­soever, because the person in charge--

Mr. Vaughan: It's been four years.

Mr. CAMM: It is the same person. We are just designating the position. He will now be the State Mining Engineer. He will be the chairman of the committee supervising the safety in all mines, whether metalliferous or coal. It has not altered the system under which we operated. It is just a matter of designating this position and saying that this is the man who will be in charge of that operation.

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

FIRST READING

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

MINERS' HOMESTEAD LEASES ACT AMENDMENT BILL

INITIATION

Hon. R. E. CAMM (Whitsunday­Minister for Mines, Energy and Police), by leave, without notice: I move-

"That the House will, at its present sitting, resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider introducing a Bill to amend the Miners' Homestead Leases Act 1913-1976 in certain particulars." Motion agreed to.

INITIATION IN COMMITTEE

(Mr. Gunn, Somerset, in the chair)

Hon. R. E. CAMM (Whitsunday-Minister for Mines, Energy and Police) (3.30 p.m.): I move-

"That a Bill be introduced to amend the Miners' Homestead Leases Act 1913-1976 in certain particulars."

The Bill I am introducing is a short one. The main effect is to remove the present restriction on the Governor in Council in relation to the area of miners' homestead perpetual leases which may be granted on a mining field outside the boundaries of a city, town or township.

At present the area which may be taken up as a homestead in these circumstances is limited to 32 hectares or such other area greater or less than 32 hectares, but not exceeding 520 hectares, as may be declared by the Governor in Council to be the maxi­mum area for homesteads in a particular mining field.

What the Bill does is to remove the 520 ha limitation on the Governor in Council. This is being done not to permit the Depart­ment of Mines to become involved in the issue of large-scale miners' homestead per­petual leases for grazing purposes but to per­mit present holders to consolidate their interests.

At the present time in various areas throughout the State there are many miners' homesteads held by members of families on trust for the beneficial owner. The Act does not provide for the registration of trusts but at the same time does not forbid the creation of them.

Problems arise when it is desired to deal with the land when a trustee is missing or deceased. In this case a person claiming to be the beneficial owner may take action under the Trusts Act to establish his claim and request the Supreme Court to appoint a trustee or make an order vesting the pro­perty in some person so that it could be dealt with.

1474 Miners' Homestead Leases, &c., Bill [2 AuGUST 1978) Papers

However, the Bill simplifies this procedure in so far as it permits the Governor in Coun­cil to declare by Order in Council the maximum area without limitation which may be held as a miner's homestead on a mining field, or part of a mining field, and consequently provides the opportunity to per­mit trustees to transfer holdings held on trust to the beneficial owner if desired. This could not be done previously in cases where the beneficial owner already held the maxi­mum area of 520 ha.

I repeat that the object of the Bill is not to permit me to recommend for grant large­scale miners' homesteads for grazing pur­poses but to afford current beneficial owners and trustees the opportunity to consolidate their holdings if they so desire.

The Bill also removes the provision in the present Act for the Governor in Council to set aside areas as miners' commons as this need is long past.

Finally the Bill corrects a grammatical error.

The amendments provided for in the Bill are most desirable in that they simplify legal procedures for holders of miners' home­steads and miners' homestead perpetual leases.

Mr. VAUGHAN (Nudgee) (3.33 p.m.): As the proposed amendments referred to by the Minister appear to require some close study, I shall wait until I have had an opportunity to peruse the contents of the Bill and reserve my comments until the second-reading stage.

Hon. R. E. CAMM (Whitsunday-Min­ister for Mines, Energy and Police) (3.34 p.m.), in reply: I can only reiterate what I said earlier. The Bill is an attempt to simplify procedures so that land now held in trust or land held by various mem­bers of a group or a family can be con­solidated into one lease. This applies only on mining fields and on those fields land may not be freeholded; it will remain as leasehold title, but issued by the Mines Department. At the present time, when a new applicant applies for a new lease in excess of a certain area-it is generally about a hectare or less-the Mines Department consults with the Lands Department to see the use to which the land might be put and what is considered to be a reasonable living area. It may be that title under the Lands Department would be a better title. This would mean that the opportunity is always there for the holder to apply to have that land freeholded. In mining fields, especially in the operating field-the one that is producing-certain difficulties are created. What this Bill will allow is the consolidation of the older miners' homesteads that have been in existence for many years to areas which are regarded as reasonable living areas.

Motion (Mr. Camm) agreed to.

Resolution reported.

FIRST READING

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

Hon. C. A. WHARTON (Burnett-Act­ing Leader of the House) (3.38 p.m.): In view of the difficulties with the amplifying system, I move-

"That the House do now adjourn."

Motion agreed to.

The House adjourned at 3.39 p.m.