Mr CREAN (Minister for Science and Technology)(10.30) —I find myself in an unusual position today in seeking the indulgence of the House to make a speech in accordance with the conventions attached to a maiden speech having, as you would be aware, Mr Deputy Speaker, previously made a number of other speeches in the House associated with my ministerial responsibilities. In doing so, I trust that neither history nor the people of Hotham will confuse, as Australian Broadcasting Corporation radio did last week, my first speech in the House with my maiden speech.

I would not like anyone to think that my views and visions-the matters that are traditionally canvassed in a maiden speech-were solely concerned with the Sales Tax Laws Amendment Bill, the subject of my first speech in the House-as important a piece of legislation as it is.

I am honoured and privileged to have been placed by my parliamentary colleagues in the Australian Labor Party in this unique position. I express my appreciation to them and my commitment to work conscientiously towards the achievement of our shared objectives. I also express my sincere appreciation to the people of Hotham for their support and trust.

In periods of fundamental change and transition there inevitably exists the potential for concerns and uncertainty. I am, however, firmly convinced that the policies of this Government, outlined in the Governor-General's Speech, are the correct policies for the future of this country in meeting the challenge of change.

Notwithstanding the difficulty being experienced by sections of the community, the Australian people recognised on 24 March that there is no serious alternative to this Government's proven record and future agenda. There was a swing against Labor in Victoria, but in the electorate of Hotham my Liberal opponent's vote also fell, despite the benefit of the donkey vote.

In the final analysis there was no doubt concerning the people of Hotham's considered assessment of their own circumstances and the national interest in their clear endorsement of the Hawke Government. Nothing the Opposition has said in this place over the past fortnight would persuade any fair-minded person to reverse that assessment. The Opposition's message has been fundamentally negative.

I now wish to pay tribute to my immediate predecessors. As honourable members may be aware, the boundaries of Hotham now embrace parts of the old seat of Henty. The past member for Henty, Joan Child, is well known in this place for her distinguished career as a member and Speaker of the House. I associate myself fully with the many tributes paid to her on her retirement from the House. I also pay tribute to the past member for Hotham, Lewis Kent, a man whose commitment and dedication cannot be called into question. It is my intention to build on the achievements of both those former members at the community level in the newly consolidated seat of Hotham. To the people of Hotham I say simply and unequivocally that I will serve and represent my electorate with integrity and to the best of my abilities.

I come to this House after 20 years of active involvement in the trade union movement, of which I have been reminded of over the past fortnight. It is a period of my life which gave me a great opportunity and for which I feel immensely grateful. The Australian trade union movement is now recognised internationally as the leading trade union movement in the world, largely because it has confronted the inevitability of change and actively involved itself in the process of change. This has included the need for considerable sacrifices in the national interest.

A strong pro-active and independent trade union movement is a bellwether of a strong democracy. In these dramatic and historic times, as we observe with humility and intense admiration the efforts of the men and women of the countries of eastern Europe to seize their destinies and overturn totalitarianism in favour of democracy, it is no mere detail or unintended consequence that those people are establishing free trade unions as an initial step.

Last week the new honourable member for Higgins (Mr Costello) in his maiden speech declared himself for the individual. The context of this ringing declaration was the asserted contest between modern trade unionism and the individual. However, the trade union movement is nothing at all if not concerned with the promotion and protection of individual rights and freedoms. This is the very bedrock principle of trade unionism. It is the essence of naivety to ignore the fact that in a democracy it is through collective means that such rights and freedoms are protected. Without the capacity for collective action in its democratic forms, whether through trade union organisation or indeed the Parliament, then individual rights are at risk and the aspirations of individuals will remain unfulfilled.

In Australia the trade union movement has a proud history and record of achievement. It has been a history of struggle and at times enormous sacrifice in the pursuit of economic and social justice.

The last seven years have seen the effective forging of a structural relationship between the labour movement's political and industrial wings, a relationship beyond mere historical ties and born out of common objectives, one able to be judged in concrete terms; a relationship which has seen the trade union movement put the national interest ahead of narrow self-interest, as the honourable member for Bennelong (Mr Howard) so honestly acknowledged last week. I think it is an important concession on his part.

The accord has enabled this country to create a completely new and practical dimension to industrial relations, wages and labour market policies, a dimension which goes beyond distribution and beyond disputation. The accord develops a new tool of economic management, one able to be applied to the task of wealth creation in a socially responsible and compassionate way. It enables a balance in the adjustment processes between competing goals of efficiency and equity. It also enables a balance between macro-economic and micro-economic concerns.

The accord is a comprehensive, radical and now proven approach, one that has still got a long way to go but which has been of enormous advantage to date in terms of this country's national interest. Above all, it is an approach, Mr Deputy Speaker, with which we must persist. The approach embodied in the accord stands in stark contrast to deregulation of the labour market: a system with no macro-economic direction, no equity or social objectives and no framework for tapping cooperation at all levels in the economy; a system based on market forces determining wage outcomes and invoking penalties against those who take industrial action. In the current economic environment it would inevitably lead to a wages breakout, to social disorder and to uncertainty.

In abandoning effective centralised wage fixation which the accord has delivered, the wages breakout would inevitably lead to rampant inflation and falling investment inducing recession and its consequences of unemployment and a wages freeze, just as occurred in 1981-82 under the coalition Government. We would again wallow in a mire of industrial disputation and litigation and, as I made the point at the last Australian Council of Trade Unions Congress, only a fool would contemplate it, yet we have an Opposition whose policies would once again achieve it. It has learned nothing from the past, nor does it understand the potential of the accord.

One simple proposition underpins the approach embodied in the accord; that is, genuine involvement leads to responsibility. The trade union movement and the Hawke Labor Government have realised this and developed it accordingly. It is salutary to reflect that those countries that have been prepared to accept the legitimacy of the role of the trade union movement and to work with it have shown themselves better able to make the necessary adjustments in these difficult economic times.

The challenge that now confronts us, Mr Deputy Speaker, is for unions and management to develop a similar constructive relationship at the enterprise and industry level, a relationship built around genuine involvement. The new wages system and award restructuring is the vehicle for building that relationship. Properly developed it can become the engine for micro-economic reform in the labour market. Progress through cooperation and, where= ever possible, agreement is the difficult path, but the alternative approach of change imposed without cooperation or agreement simply provides a recipe for social disruption.

Change in the name of progress achieved through conflict and social disruption is not my vision of Australia or our common future, nor is its promotion a part of my concept of the role of government in a democracy. We ignore recent lessons from the international experience at our own peril. The difficult task in relation to change, that of creating the economic and social circumstances or infrastructure in which sustainable change can occur, has been one of the Hawke Government's greatest achievements.

There has been an attitudinal change which accepts the economic imperative that change must occur if we are to maintain our high living standards into the future. For the first time ever in this country, for example, wages now have a structural link to productivity. Wage negotiations are not just a vehicle for distributing the benefits, but also for improving our productive capacity, our national wealth and our living standards.

These issues bring me to my portfolio responsibilities. As Minister for Science and Technology it was suggested in the Australian Financial Review that I had been parked in this particular ministry. I refute that suggestion emphatically. Whatever the future may hold for me, I see my appointment as a great honour, and the task ahead of me as one of immense importance to this Government and indeed to the future of this nation.

Science and technology are the hallmarks of our age. They lie behind our greatest achievements and some of our greatest threats. They shape our lives more profoundly than perhaps anything else. The harnessing of science and technology to the task of addressing the challenge we face as a nation is arguably one of our most important goals. I pay tribute to my predecessor, the honourable member for Lalor (Mr Barry Jones), for his untiring championship of this view.

We must ensure that Australia gets the greatest value and benefit from its research and innovation. We must ensure that through science and technology Australia's industries are more efficient and competitive and new industries are generated, that our environment is protected, that our natural resources are well managed, and that the health and safety of the Australian people are safeguarded.

Historically Australian science and technology have yielded great benefits for Australia's agricultural and mineral industries. Their future contributions to these industries will be just as, if not more, important as the industries become more technology intensive and as international markets become more competitive. In particular we must make greater use of research and innovation in the crucial task of adding value to our primary industries.

While the primary industries will remain vital sources of export earnings, they alone will not resolve our balance of payments problems. We must also make our manufacturing and service industries more competitive, as it is in these sectors that international trade is growing most rapidly. I do not believe we can do this without science and technology, and it is one area of scientific research and application where I propose to take a close interest. The need in these sectors is not only to develop new high technology companies but also to use science and technology to create, right across these industries, the productive culture that I discussed earlier as the goal of labour market reforms.

Another area that I want to pay particular attention to relates to environmental protection and sustainable development. There is, I believe, insufficient recognition that science and technology provide the key to integrating economic and environmental objectives, to converting `sustainable development' from an uncertain concept to an attainable goal. Without improved technologies and without policies that are firmly based on science, it is hard to see how we will be able to resolve in any rational way the growing conflict over economic development and environmental protection.

I believe that greater awareness of this `green' role of science and technology will be an important factor in influencing more young people to pursue studies and careers in science and engineering. The drift of students, especially the brightest of them, away from science courses at the tertiary level has grave implications, not only for Australian science but for Australia. Mr Deputy Speaker, the wide significance of science and technology will require me to work closely with many of my ministerial colleagues and I look forward to this collaboration.

The Government has recognised the crucial importance of science and technology. Under the Hawke Government Australia's total expenditure on research and development has substantially increased in real terms. Most importantly the Government's 150 per cent tax incentive for industrial research and development and other initiatives has stimulated the business sector, historically the weakest component of Australia's research system, to more than double its research and development spending. The Government has also implemented a wide range of changes to the research structure aimed at giving Australia a stronger, more effective and more productive research system.

I do not deny that there have been problems or that problems remain. Certainly the redirection, restructuring and reorganisation that have been necessary, and are occurring not only in Australia but in all industrial nations, combined with the constraints on government expenditure imposed by Australia's economic situation, have created difficulties in the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), the universities and elsewhere.

However, the Government has taken a number of steps to address these difficulties, notably those announced in last year's statement by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and my predecessor, the former Minister for Science and Technology, and in the Prime Minister's campaign policy speech. These initiatives are specific and concrete. The Opposition has not had the opportunity to take such initiatives because it has been out of office too long, but its record does not exactly inspire confidence.

There is another measure of the significance the Government and Opposition attach to science and technology, what the leaders say about the issue and how often. It may sound a trivial point, but it does have an underlying significance. It is rather like the number of job advertisements being regarded as one of the best guides to the current state of the economy. In this context I would like to quote from the editorial of the latest issue of Search, the official publication of the Australian and New Zealand Association for the Advancement of Science. The editorial reports the number of words devoted to science and technology in the policy speeches of the last election. The scores were:

Hawke, ALP 320 words (approximately 10% of the total), Peacock, Liberal Party, 40, (0.4%). Of the other parties Haines, Democrats, scored 300 (2%), with Blunt, National Party, making no mention of science even though Mr Peacock's only allusion to the topic was to suggest that the emphasis for research should be shifted back to primary industries.

That is a desperately limited view of science. Being out of office, the Opposition can only talk about science, but it cannot even do that sensibly.

The goals that Australia must achieve in the area of science and technology can be summed up in three words: excellence, cooperation and application. The first, excellence, is the least of our problems. This country has an outstanding record of scientific achievement. We can be proud of the international standing of our scientific institutions such as the CSIRO and our universities. Our task then is to maintain and further enhance the high quality of our research.

In the other two areas, cooperation and application, our record has been less good and decidedly patchy. We must increase interaction between different research groups to avoid unnecessary duplication, to coordinate and strengthen our research effort in particular areas, and to improve scientific and technical education and training. There are undoubtedly effective links between science and industry sectors such as agriculture and minerals, but even here we need to strengthen relationships, especially to add greater value to these products.

It is in the manufacturing and service sectors that links between public sector research and private sector commercial activity are the weakest and where Australia must achieve a greater return on its investment in relevant areas of research. This requires a greater recognition by business of the importance of building up its research and development capacity and better relationships between industry and the universities and research institutions. This is happening, but it must be taken further. I firmly believe that industry will be convinced of the importance of research only when it can see the benefits at the micro-economic level; that is, in terms of the profitability of individual companies, not by general arguments about the necessity for more research. It is a key reason why I and the Government see the decision to establish a range of cooperative research centres as one of the most significant and exciting developments in Australia's future. I will elaborate on that at a future stage.

To conclude, in my previous positions I have always had regard to the national interest and not simply a sectional one. Anything I have achieved has come through my involvement in the trade union movement, a movement broadly representative of the community. A single voice, quite frankly, has no capacity to deliver.

The trade union movement has delivered over the past seven years; the Government has also delivered. I see my role in the House and as a Minister in the Government as building on the Labor Government's collective achievements. In that process I am committed to placing the national interest first and developing through consultation and cooperation the most effective mechanisms for creating a more just and equitable society, and one best equipped to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century.

Honourable members-Hear, hear!

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Les Scott) —Before I call the honourable member for Pearce, I remind the House that this is the honourable member's maiden speech, and I ask the House to extend to him the usual courtesies.