Senator CHRIS EVANS —My question is directed to the Minister for Resources and Energy. Does the minister recall including in his declaration of pecuniary interests his holding of shares in the diversified investment company Argo Investments Ltd? Is the minister aware that the 1997 annual report for Argo Investments Ltd indicates at page 4 that one of the largest investments made by Argo is in BHP, with $24.1 million worth of shares? Is the minister further aware that Argo Investments also has substantial holdings in the resources companies Ashton Mining, CSR, Renison Gold, North Ltd, Rio Tinto, Santos and Western Mining? Given that the minister felt it necessary to sell his own CSR shares in October last year because that company held an interest in the mining company Nabalco, why has he not felt it necessary to divest his Argo Investments shares for the very same reason?

Senator PARER (Resources and Energy) —Senator Evans is quite right. On my being appointed we got rid of, or my wife got rid of, all shares in regard to direct involvement in the mining industry. Advice was sought at the time, and it was pointed out that this is basically an investment company which is equivalent to what you would almost call a blind trust. You have no control over it whatsoever, no interest in it whatsoever. You can have no influence on it whatsoever in any shape or form. For that reason, it was agreed that that sort of investment was satisfactory in accordance with the guidelines.

I might also say that at the time advice was sought, similar advice was received in respect of a company called Australia Foundation, which has a broad portfolio of shares over which there is no interest. I do not know personally what particular investments those companies have. It is a blind investment. It is up to them as to how they make those investments.

Senator CHRIS EVANS —Madam President, I ask a supplementary question. I thank the minister for his answer, but are you aware that the 1997 annual report of Argo Investments lists at page 31 some 143,000 shares in the company Energy Resources of Australia Ltd? Can the minister assure the Senate that he has at no time since becoming minister made any decision relating to Energy Resources of Australia? I remind the minister that the ERA is the operator of the Jabiluka uranium mine. If the minister cannot give such an assurance, and given the precedent set by Senator Gibson, what action does he now propose to take?

Senator Alston —Madam President, I rise on a point of order.

Senator Robert Ray —You got rid of your shares in a big hurry in April.

Senator Ferguson —What have you done with your money?

Senator Alston —I think we would like to know what you have done with all your investments after 10 years as a minister, too. There is not much to show for it, is there? Madam President, the only possible relevance of that question asked by Senator Evans is whether or not Senator Parer had any capacity to control or influence the decision making process of that company. What he has conceded is that at one point in the year—in other words, an annual report snapshot—it might be possible to determine what shares were owned by an investment company. That report itself comes out long after the period to which it refers. There can be no possible basis for suggesting that Senator Parer would be aware of the holdings of that company at any one point in time relevant to the decision making process. There is no possible basis for suggesting that he could affect any decision made. It is therefore utterly irrelevant.

The PRESIDENT —There is no point of order.

Senator Faulkner —Madam President, I rise on a further point of order, which is a point of order. Senator Alston is deliberately using the tactic of taking non-points of order through the device of points of order during question time to attempt to give Senator Parer some cover on questions properly directed to him. The issues relating to the standing orders or procedural or process issues before the Senate are not even discussed or canvassed at all in any of these phoney points of order that Senator Alston is taking as a device to cover up for Senator Parer. I ask you, Madam President, if he does it again to discipline him.

The PRESIDENT —There is no point of order.

Senator PARER (Resources and Energy) —The groups to which Senator Evans referred have a portfolio of stocks. If he wants to go down that track it would mean that no-one in this place can have an investment in a superannuation company or in any financial institution, because people like AMP, people like—

Senator Faulkner —Why did you sell CSR?

Senator PARER —Because they were a direct investment, Senator. That is why. Can't you understand? You are as thick as a brick.

Senator Faulkner —What about ERA?

The PRESIDENT —Senator Faulkner, one of your senators has asked a question, and he should be able to hear the answer.

Senator PARER —It means that no-one here can have a superannuation fund or an insurance policy with a company, whether it be AMP, National Mutual or any other organisation or financial institution of that type, because they do have broad portfolios of investments, the same as this particular group. As I mentioned earlier, this was the sort of advice that I sought, in fact I got my wife to seek, before she agreed to make those investments.