Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download PDFDownload PDF 

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment

NOTICES

Notices of Motion were given, as follows-

Senator MacGibbon: To move on the next day of sitting-That the Senate-

(a) condemns the Government for its moral cowardice in failing to defend the essential national interest over that of the Transport Workers' Union (TWU) in relation to their ban on the export of Australian chilled beef;

(b) notes that this ban has nothing to do with the working conditions under which TWU members are employed but is purely a selfish attempt by the union movement to pay back the Australian rural export industries for applying the rule of law to the irresponsible Australian Meat Industry Employees' Union over their lawless actions at Mudjinberri; and

(c) notes that, as the chilled meat export trade is worth at least $1.25m per day to Australia and that as the Labor Government has increased Australia's debt by 43 per cent in the last 2 years so that every Australian who files a tax return is now paying $20 per week to meet the interest on overseas federal borrowings, any action by a Government in supporting illegal strikers in the export trade is criminally negligent.

Senator Haines: To move on the next day of sitting-That the Senate-

(a) deplores Australia's poor record of Government funding for child care which, of all the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development nations, places this nation ahead only of Spain, Portugal and Turkey;

(b) condemns the Government's action in cutting back funding to child care by $30m as announced in the May 1985 Economic Statement; and

(c) calls upon the Government to:

(i) not only reverse its decision forthwith, but also increase funding to child care by the same amount, and

(ii) provide some evidence that it intends to honour its commitment to find 20 000 new places in child care centres.

Senator Kilgariff: To move on the next day of sitting-That the Senate, in view of the economic difficulties faced by pastoralists who, in years of drought, are forced to sell off large amounts of stock, thus generating extraordinarily high incomes in those years and incurring similarly high taxation liabilities, calls upon the Government to-

(a) give consideration to re-instating all the provisions of an income equalisation scheme which would again allow pastoralists to have their incomes for those years levelled out over a number of years, to ease the heavy taxation burden which they would otherwise incur; and

(b) incorporate into any such scheme provision for a Government investment fund whereby the excess income generated through de-stocking in drought years can be invested in a Government fund and exempt from taxation until such time as it is withdrawn, for example, in a year when the pastoralist is expecting a lower financial return and will need considerable funds for re-stocking.

Senator Reid: To move on the next day of sitting-That the Senate notes with concern the actions of the Australian Capital Territory branch of the Builders Labourers Federation (BLF) and the tactics used to coerce building companies and contractors to sign a letter of support for the BLF, namely, the threat to impose black bans on any company which will not give such support.

Senator Haines: To move on the next day of sitting-That the Senate-

(a) expresses concern at the continuing great disparity in Government funding between privately owned and public housing which:

(i) has ensured that there is now a disturbing crisis in the public housing and private rental markets with ever increasing waiting lists for public housing, and escalating rents as housing stocks decrease and competition for existing stocks increase, and

(ii) falls most heavily on the young homeless and single parent families; and

(b) acknowledges that there is a crisis in public housing and urges the Government to redirect a far greater proportion of its funds for housing to the public and rental housing sectors.

Senator Michael Baume: To move on the next day of sitting-That the Senate, noting with concern the recent warnings relating to the Government's inappropriate economic policies from-

(a) SYNTEC Economic Services Pty Ltd, that ""a destructive combination of rising inflation and fundamental imbalances in the external sector of the economy will undermine both financial markets and our economic performance'';

(b) the Institute of Economic and Industry Research cutting in half the Budget's economic growth forecasts from 4.5 per cent to 2.3 per cent;

(c) mining leader Sir Arvi Parbo replacing his welcome to the Budget with criticism that the Government's backdown on wage discounting will harm Australia's international competitiveness and that he was now ""dismal and gloomy''; and

(d) Westpac, that the Budget's basic strategy is already in jeopardy because of a slackening of the Government's resolve to restrain wages growth and that, as a result, Australia now faces a prolonged period of very high interest rates,

condemns the Government for renegeing on its Budget time undertaking to fully discount wage indexation for the impact of currency devaluation and for its failure to take adequate anti-inflationary measures in the Budget, particularly by failing to reduce Government spending and the deficit this year by at least a further $1 billion, so leaving an undue burden on monetary policy resulting in record interest rates.

Senator Haines: To move on the next day of sitting-That the Senate-

(a) expresses concern at the lack of uniformity in criminal injuries compensation legislation in Australia; and

(b) urges the Government to instruct the next meeting of Commonwealth and State Attorneys-General to examine ways of achieving uniformity under the following minimum principles:

(i) the maximum amount payable under the existing legislation is inadequate and should be at least $100 000,

(ii) that awards of compensation should be determined on the basis that, on the balance of probabilities, the intended recipient of the award has been the victim of a crime rather than proof of conviction being required, and

(iii) that victims of crime should not have to relive their experience through the trauma of a ""second trial'' in order to have their compensation determined.