Senator HILL (Minister for the Environment)(10.20 a.m.) —I just wanted to draw the committee's attention to one fact. I say to Senator Lees and Senator Harradine that although we are debating these amendments together they do, in a way, relate to two different issues.

Senator Faulkner —It was your request for an amendment.

Senator HILL —When people vote, I want them to understand exactly what they are voting on. I am trying to be helpful, Senator Faulkner. Much of our discussion yesterday was about extending the completion of the five-year period to the year 2002. The amendments that do that are those contained in requests 2 and 3 on page B94BA453. The other three relate to the issue of whether the final figure in reserve should be 30 per cent of the total or $300 million. The figure of $300 million was put in when we believed that the capital contribution would be $1 billion. So 30 per cent was the expression put in the bill, although we had in mind—and we have said publicly many times—that the figure that we were anticipating would therefore be in reserve would be $300 million.

When we increased the capital contribution to the fund, the effect of that, without amending this bill—of course, this bill was introduced before the decision to increase the capital fund—would have been to increase the amount that had to be left over at the end of the period of time. That was not our intention. It was still our intention, even though we had more money in the fund, to limit the amount left over to $300 million.

If the committee decides not to accept our amendment, the effect will be that more money has to be left over at the end of the period. I am not sure that that is what the committee is really wanting to do because we obviously want to expend, to the year 2002, right up to the total of the fund less $300 million, not the total of the fund less—I am advised—$367 million. That is why we are seeking to amend the bill in terms of the first set of requests: Nos. 4,5 and 6. There are two distinctly different questions, I would suggest, to the committee. I have heard some objection, particularly from my friend Senator Faulkner that the term of the trust should not be extended out to 2002, but I have not actually heard anyone argue against the principle that the remaining figure should be $300 million rather than $367 million. I ask the committee to bear that in mind when we vote.