6681
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
Thursday 26 February 2004 ______
Mr Speaker (The Hon. John Joseph Aquilina) took the chair at 10.00 a.m.
Mr Speaker offered the Prayer.
INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION
Report
Mr Speaker announced the receipt, pursuant to section 78 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, of the report entitled "Report on Investigation into the Introduction of Contraband into the High Risk Management Unit at Goulburn Correctional Centre", dated February 2004.
Ordered to be printed.
POLICE AMENDMENT (CRIME REDUCTION AND REPORTING) BILL
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 19 February.
Mr PETER DEBNAM (Vaucluse) [10.01 a.m.]: Last week I introduced this bill and spoke for some time about its objectives. I will read a couple of them and move through a few other topics fairly quickly. The objective of the bill is essentially to change the police commissioner's contract and establish two objectives for the commissioner: first, to reduce crime and, secondly, to encourage the highest possible reporting of crime. That is very different from his current contract, which has two objectives: to reduce crime and also the perception of crime. The difficulty that the Opposition has with the commissioner's contract is that reducing the perception of crime requires media strategies. An extraordinary emphasis is placed on media strategies by the Government and by the commissioner's office, and we think that it is counterproductive. Given that the police commissioner's contract is up for renewal in May this year, it is an ideal time for the Government to change the terms of the contract or to accept the proposal I put forward in this bill to change the contract and establish the two objectives: to reduce crime and to increase the reporting of crime.
It is worthwhile commenting on a hysterical press release by the police Minister last week after I addressed the House on the bill. I will comment briefly on a few points. The press release is dated 19 February and consists of three pages. I did not think anyone on the planet apart from me was going to read it, but I read it. The Minister starts by attacking me for my "consistent and vicious attacks on Commissioner Ken Moroney". That is simply not true. It might be in the Minister's mind but it just shows how out of touch he is with the policing portfolio and what is happening in New South Wales. What I am doing with this bill and in many public statements is saying that the commissioner's contract is fundamentally flawed. Ken Moroney is a career police officer who has had an excellent career in NSW Police. The Opposition has no difficulties with Ken Moroney; our problem is with his contract. It is wrong and it should be changed.
The Minister went on to say in his press release that I had claimed that Commissioner Moroney was not committed to reducing crime. That is not true either; I did not say that. I have acknowledged that the commissioner's current contract has two objectives: to reduce crime and the perception of crime. The perception of crime objective is just plain wrong. The Minister went on to quote from my speech, in which I said, "Uncle Ken, for the people of New South Wales, has now become a distant relative. He really is not pursuing their interests at the moment. He hasn't been since he took over the job." But what the Minister did not include in the press release was the next sentence, which stated that the reason is that the commissioner's contract is fundamentally flawed.
The Minister's press release then runs through a bit of abuse, which I will not read into Hansard, and then refers to reporting percentages. The Minister might like to clarify his press release because the percentages in his bullet points state that the reporting of assault has increased from 30 percent in 2001 to 39 percent in 2003 6682 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004 according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS]. But according to the ABS there is no published figure for that, so it would be interesting to know where the Minister got the figure from, whether it is correct or simply a typo. The Minister stated that the reporting of crime was increasing, and that is all very good. That is our objective. It is very clear what we are trying to do: to make sure that the police commissioner, the Government and every police officer in New South Wales encourages the highest possible reporting of crime. The press release also states that a cursory glance at the NSW Police web site showed at least two links to report crime.
The Minister then talked about the Police Assistance Line. He did not talk about the second link. I can only assume that the second link is the email link that is shown on the police web site. I suggest that if the Minister tried to use that link to report crime he would not get very far. I tried to do it and after an exchange of about three or four emails with police they convinced me that there was no way I could use that link to report crime. As I said, the rest of the press release is hysterical. Getting back to the real issue, we need to acknowledge that it is counterproductive when the Government and the commissioner's office spend almost all their time talking down the crime problems. Having taken over the shadow portfolio after the election last year I focused on an issue that was obviously out of control, and that was gun crime. An article in the Daily Telegraph of 28 May 2003 was headed "Every second day, somebody is shot in Sydney". I am quoted in the article as saying, "Despite all the warnings from crime authorities in recent years, the Carr Government has just been asleep at the wheel about gun crime, especially in south-west Sydney."
I suffered every abuse in the book in the 24 hours following that, from the Government and to some extent from the commissioner's office, which was saying that there was not a problem. I was putting on the public record the fact that there was a major problem with gun crime in south-west Sydney, despite the Government's denial. The next day the police Minister issued a press release, dated 29 May, in which he again ridiculed what I was saying. He twisted it to suggest that I was trying to undermine the national handgun buyback program. The point I made was that it had nothing to do with gun crime in south-west Sydney. The police Minister said in the middle of his press release, "And he's produced a wacky five-point plan on crime". I pushed that five-point plan from April through to October. Honourable members would be aware that I kept putting out a list of gun crime in that entire period. It listed every shooting, armed robbery, stolen firearm, carjacking and drive-by shooting. Finally, on 23 September, the Minister produced his own plan, a nine-point plan.
So it took him from May through to September to realise that he had to do something. I continued to pressure the Government after the September press release and finally, on 22 October last year, the Government created Task Force Gain. But it had taken six months of pressure from the Opposition and pressure from the community to get the Government to move beyond denial and abuse of the Opposition. That is a window on the problem that we have in New South Wales at the moment with crime. The Government is more focused on silencing critics and denying problems than it is on actually doing something about the problems. I indicated that one of the main objectives of the bill I have introduced is to increase the reporting of crime. The latest ABS figures on personal crime show that in 2001, 38.6 per cent of robbery was reported to police, 29.8 per cent of assault was reported and 16.1 per cent of sexual assault was reported.
In 2002 those figures have increased. As I said before, the Minister is quoting 2003 figures, and I do not know where he got them. He might like to explain that. But whatever the figures are, the Opposition, the Government and the Parliament want reporting figures to be as high as possible. The figure for reporting car theft hovers within a few per cent of 95 per cent each year. Most people report the theft of their car because it is their second biggest asset and they want it back. They also need to report the theft for insurance purposes. That is why the reporting figure is up to 95 per cent. We would like to use that sort of figure as a target to increase the other reporting figures for robbery, assault, sexual assault, break and enter, attempted break and enter, and so forth.
The other reasonably high figure is for break, enter and steal, which tends to hover around 70 per cent. The reason for the relatively high reporting rate is that typically the victim intends to claim on an insurance policy and would need a police report to do so. But for attempted break and enter and for crimes against a person, such as assaults, the figure goes down as low as 30 per cent. It is in everybody's interest that we increase that reporting percentage as much as possible. To do that the Government must either accept this bill or do what it usually does with my bills: wait a few weeks and then introduce its own version of the bill, which is what it did with bill relating to the confiscation of cars from car hoons. I have no difficulty with that. I am prepared to have the Government vote this down, if it really wants to play politics, and then come back into the House next month and introduce its own version of the bill. If that bill fulfils the objective I have set out in this bill then I will be pleased to applaud the Government. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6683
Alternatively, the Government can simply change the commissioner's contract. In the ongoing negotiations with Commissioner Ken Moroney, the Government can say: We are going to change the contract; we are going to get rid of this perception of crime thing—which is all about a pre-election stunt and media management—and we are going to move toward more reporting of crime. Beyond changing the contract it also has to be possible for people to report crime. At the moment built-in barriers exist across the system for reporting of crime. Many people who want to report a crime know that they will go to a police station and they will either be told to ring the police assistance line or they will be told, "Yes, all right, we will take care of it", but they will not get an incident number. They may get somebody to actually record the report and give them an incident number but, generally speaking, there is no community confidence that reporting the crime will result in its being added to the police computer system and that something will be done about it.
That is the effect of the Government's changes to the crime reporting system. It has established the police assistance line, which the Coalition has said on a number of occasions is simply a glorified filing cabinet. We are not convinced that these crimes actually get through to the local police. I believe it is also one of the reasons that a disconnection has developed between local police and local communities, and that is of great concern. It is probably time for the Government to have a look at the police assistance line and to do what we have been suggesting for some time: shut it down, put the resources back into reconnecting local communities and local police and ensure the report goes through the shortest possible channel to get to local police officers.
Mid last year an Auditor-General's report on the police assistance line indicated that about 37,000 calls were abandoned. The police Minister's response was to say, "Well, that is not a bad percentage for a call centre when you look at the totality of it". But the Minister has to understand that these were calls for assistance from people in the community who were victims of crime or fearing crime. The fact that 37,000 of them abandoned the call before it was answered has got to be a major concern to everybody.
By changing the contract negotiations and the reporting channels we can make real progress. It is important that the Government now address this issue. It is obviously going to have to respond to this bill in the next few weeks and, as I said, I would be delighted if it embraced the bill. I would also be delighted if the Government introduced its own version of the bill or if it simply changed the contract negotiations and incorporated the changes in the police commissioner's contract. It is worth pointing out again that on so many issues we have had to lead this Government kicking and screaming with regard to law and order. Despite the fact that the Premier is a master storyteller, getting out with his spin and pretending he is tough on law and order, nothing could be further from the truth.
We had to lead the Government in an innovative measure of confiscating the vehicles of car hoons back in 1996. We had to lead the Government in getting more police in New South Wales, and we did that over a couple of elections. We have had to lead the Premier on reform of bail laws, and the Government is making slow progress on that. We have had to lead the Government on oversight—the Director of Public Prosecutions is an issue that the shadow Attorney General has pursued again in the past 24 hours. We have had to drag the Government, kicking and screaming, to fight gun crime in south-west Sydney, and after six months finally getting Task Force Gain established. We have had to lead the Government on the issue of crime statistics, and I note that it is 15 years since the Coalition first sought more frequent than annual reporting of crime statistics. It has taken 15 years of pushing from the Coalition to move to the quarterly crime statistics system that was announced last month. We will continue to push for at least monthly crime statistics that are broken down by local area command and by local government area.
We have had to push the Government on domestic violence. Depending on the local area command at the moment, police first-response units spend about 50 to 70 per cent of their time dealing with domestic violence issues. Clearly there has to be a reform in the way domestic violence is dealt with to allow police to deal with other issues as well. We have led the Government on radio encryption. We have pointed out that Paul Whelan, one of the former police Ministers, promised back in 1997 that he would ensure digital encryption of all police radios. It is now 2004 and it has not happened. There are only a couple of channels of police radios that have digital encryption, and they are used for very high priority and high security tasks. Meanwhile, the rest of the police have to deal with an open circuit. As a result, gangs can simply buy a $70 scanner and listen to police radio. No wonder the smash and grab gangs and the armed robbery gangs are able to stay one step ahead of the police. No wonder that people who report crime are occasionally threatened by the criminals themselves because they have heard the name and address of the victim of the crime over a police radio. Digital encryption on all police radio channels must be a matter of urgency.
The issue that we are raising today is the reporting of crime. We have again led the Government by saying: let us change the system to ensure that we are all working to get the highest possible reporting of crime. 6684 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
It is important, and local members should look at their own community and support the bill. I would like to see all members talk about this bill, and I would certainly like to see them support it or argue in caucus for the Government to introduce its own bill. I commend the bill to the House.
Debate adjourned on motion by Mr Neville Newell.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Postponement of Business
General Business Notice of Motion (for Bills) No. 3 called on, and postponed by Mr Andrew Humpherson.
CROSS-BORDER COMMISSION BILL
Bill introduced and read a first time.
Second Reading
Mr DONALD PAGE (Ballina—Deputy Leader of The Nationals) [10.20 a.m.]: I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
In 2000 when I first introduced the Cross-Border Commission Bill the need for a formal body to deal with cross- border issues was obvious to residents of New South Wales living in border regions. In the four years since the bill was introduced and rejected by the Government, the need for a Cross-Border Commission has become even more acute. Communities along the New South Wales-Queensland border, the Murray River, the New South Wales-South Australia border and those adjacent to the Australian Capital Territory continue to be adversely affected by their proximity to Queensland, Victoria, South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory. At present any consideration of cross-border issues is undertaken on an ad hoc basis by a couple of officers in the Premier's Department under the umbrella of the Regional Communities Consultative Council. I do not wish to denigrate the officers who consider these issues; it is the Government that has failed to resource the investigation properly and to resolve cross-border issues.
In brief, the bill provides for more thorough and effective resolution of cross-border issues through the creation of a body with the power to call witnesses, hear evidence and undertake all other actions necessary to resolve cross-border issues and to make recommendations to the Premier regarding cross-border solutions. This body, the Cross-Border Commission, will be required to prepare an annual report for Parliament in relation to the results of its inquiries, recommendations to the Premier and any action or inaction on the part of government. The commission will comprise representatives of the New South Wales Government, consumers, business, farmers and local government, and will have the capacity to appoint other representatives to a maximum of eight. Most importantly, the commission will be reviewed after five years to investigate its effectiveness and whether it needs to continue.
When the Government voted down this constructive bill in 2001 it claimed that the commission was not needed because the existing arrangements for dealing with cross-border concerns were satisfactory. This is despite the fact that the Premier's spokesman was reported in the Tweed newspaper the Daily News as supporting my idea. He said:
It doesn't matter if the proposal is put forward by Labor, Liberals, Nationals or Independents, if it's a good idea, it's a good idea.
Queensland Premier Beattie agreed, telling the Daily News:
I am very receptive to a suggestion like this. If we can do anything to work together to find a solution, we should try.
If the Government's claims are true that existing arrangements are satisfactory, why do so many cross-border problems remain unresolved and why is this fact so readily acknowledged by both the Premiers of Queensland and of New South Wales? It is difficult to believe the current arrangement is as effective as the Government claims when, according to my advice, the two existing cross-border groups in the Premier's Department have not met since 1999. Moreover, the last community forum on cross-border issues was held in the Tweed in February 1999, one month before the March 1999 election. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6685
We need an effective, committed and active Cross-Border Commission, not one that meets only at election time or one that focuses only on issues that come to the attention of the Premier. The Cross-Border Commission will solve myriad problems affecting businesses and communities in border areas. In New South Wales payroll tax applies above $600,000 at a rate of 6 per cent. In Queensland a 4.75 per cent rate is imposed above $850,000. Victoria's payroll tax rate is 5.25 per cent, with a threshold of $550,000. The rate in the Australian Capital Territory is 6.85 per cent, with a yearly threshold of $1.25 million. It is very difficult for big employers in New South Wales border areas to compete when they have to pay much more payroll tax. Two good examples of such businesses on the North Coast are the Northern Co-operative Meat Company and the Southern Cross University. Furthermore, businesses that operate on both sides of the border must often take out two workers compensation policies, adding substantially to business costs. Moreover, workers compensation premiums for the construction industry in New South Wales are 7.8 per cent while in Queensland they are 4.3 per cent and in Victoria, 3.8 per cent.
One of the greatest ongoing problems is daylight saving. Daylight saving causes major disruptions for businesses, employees and consumers, particularly in Coolangatta and Tweed Heads, which are split by the New South Wales-Queensland border. The club industry, which keeps alive many small businesses and community groups and employs thousands of locals, is also out of pocket because of cross-border issues such as daylight saving and differing tax rates. Indeed, the Tweed Bowls Club has indicated that if the Carr Government persists with its new clubs tax it will have to relocate to Queensland. Residents of New South Wales who enjoy fishing can be fined for engaging in that activity just over the Victorian and Queensland borders due to different licensing requirements. During the Easter holidays New South Wales hoteliers are restricted to making bar sales only on Good Friday afternoon, which prompts many patrons to drive across the border to buy take-home liquor.
Other general issues include a range of tax disparities, varying rules to establish a business and gain licences, 1800 and 1300 telephone numbers failing to work across borders, the lack of reciprocal ambulance agreements and the variation in education courses between the States. These difficulties cause extra cost burdens that run into millions of dollars a year and widespread inconvenience for residents and businesses. A proposal for an independent, standalone cross-border commission is a substantive bid to tackle seriously the problems confronting border communities. The Cross-Border Commission Bill aims to fix these problems once and for all. It is not a political bill; it is genuinely designed to alleviate the very real problems experienced by people and businesses in cross-border communities. Put simply, this legislation will help tens of thousands of people who live in cross-border communities, and surely we are elected to this place to help people solve their problems.
Specifically, clause 4 of the bill provides for the constitution of the Cross-Border Commission of New South Wales. This clause provides that the commission is to consist of a chairperson and between four and eight part-time members appointed by the Premier. Members of the commission will be suitably qualified to represent one or more of the following interests in relation to border communities: first, the interests of consumers; secondly, the interests of business; thirdly, the interests of farmers; and, fourthly, the interests of local government. These four interest groups are mentioned in the bill. However, if the case can be made for other groups to be represented directly on the commission they should also be included, to a maximum of eight members. The part-time members are to be residents of New South Wales. However, the commission can call witnesses and have dialogue with interstate people and agencies. We have deliberately built in a mechanism to stop the commission becoming a political plaything of the government of the day. To this end, a person cannot be a part-time member if he or she is a member of the Parliament of New South Wales or the Commonwealth Parliament.
Clause 5 provides that the chairperson is to be appointed by the Governor on the recommendation of the Premier, after consultation by the Premier with the Leader of the Opposition. If the Opposition comprises two or more recognised political parties, the leaders of those parties must be consulted. Obviously the person appointed as commissioner will have a good knowledge of cross-border issues with regard to New South Wales- Queensland, New South Wales-Victoria, New South Wales-South Australia and New South Wales-Australian Capital Territory. Some proposed appointing an interstate person as chair. However, there is no legal basis for compelling an interstate resident to take on the job. Rather, the key to the commission's effectiveness is its ability to liaise with the other States. The commission will have the power to call witnesses, hear evidence and undertake all other actions necessary for it to make regular recommendations to the Premier and to table an annual report in Parliament. These recommendations will concern the economic, social and other issues affecting communities in regions bordering other States and the Australian Capital Territory.
Clause 8 sets out the following functions of the commission. Paragraph (a) provides that the commission will invite members of a border community to make admissions to it in relation to matters affecting 6686 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004 that community. Paragraph (b) enables the commission to conduct inquiries into such matters affecting border communities as are referred to it by the Premier or as the commission considers appropriate. Paragraph (c) enables the commission to identify issues affecting border communities and to make recommendations to the Premier regarding such issues. Paragraph (d) provides for the commission to prepare an annual report for tabling in Parliament regarding the results of its inquiries into matters affecting border communities and in relation to any action taken by the Government as a consequence of any recommendation referred to in paragraph (c). Paragraph (e) enables the commission to undertake such other functions as are conferred or imposed on it by or under any other Act or law.
Clause 9 requires the commission to prepare an annual report to be forwarded to the Premier and that the Premier is to table the report in each House of Parliament as soon as practicable after the report is forwarded to the Premier. The report must include details of any recommendations made to the Premier during the period to which the report relates, as well as details of any Government action or inaction in relation to those recommendations. Importantly, we do not view the commission as having an infinite life. We want it to be a small, smart and effective body, which is intent, in essence, on working itself out of a job when all the cross- border issues are resolved. To this end we have included in the bill a provision that the commission be reviewed after five years. Hopefully, the commission would have solved all the significant cross-border problems by then and could be wound up.
In rejecting this bill in 2001 the Carr Government said that the legislation did not require the commission to directly solve cross-border problems. This is a pathetic argument because the bill specifically requires the commission to make recommendations to the Premier on solutions. These recommendations, and the Premier's action or inaction, will be made public in the commission's annual report to Parliament. It is up to the Premier and the Government of the day to adopt the recommendations if they want the cross-border issues solved.
Another Government objection was that the commission would not have cross-jurisdictional representation. Quite clearly, it is not possible for us in New South Wales to compulsorily require interstate representation on the commission. Moreover, it is not necessary because the commission has the power to call witnesses and it is expected that many of these would be from interstate. Therefore, the capacity to involve people from both sides of the border is built into the bill. The New South Wales Nationals and the Liberal Party believe that the cross-border commission, as proposed today, is the ideal vehicle to examine and devise solutions to these and other issues. The differences between State taxes and State regulations must be minimised on State borders to enable the communities involved to function more normally.
The section within the Premier's Department currently dealing with border issues is underresourced and lacks transparency. The proposal of The Nationals is for a stand-alone statutory authority, ultimately responsible only to the Parliament of this State. It is the fact that governments come and go and they vary in political complexion from State to State. The benefit of a commission is that it is above party politics and is able to address the issues irrespective of the party in power in a particular State. Moreover, the commission will be relatively small but nevertheless representative of the community. I believe this is critical to its success. These community representatives will have a strong interest in finding solutions so they will be focused and keen to tackle issues. When I first introduced the bill in 2000 the positive feedback for border communities was very strong indeed. They want this legislation. I call on all members of the New South Wales Parliament to support the bill.
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted.
ROAD TRANSPORT EFFICIENCY BILL
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 19 February.
Mr PETER DRAPER (Tamworth) [10.30 a.m.]: I am pleased that the honourable member for Clarence has indicated support for the bill. I hope he contributes to the debate because we welcome his support, along with that of The Nationals and the Liberal Party.
Mr Thomas George: What about Country Labor?
Mr PETER DRAPER: I was about to ask that question. Where is Country Labor on this issue? Country Labor can prove its worth by supporting the bill, which is important to country people and should cross all political boundaries. I will be interested in how Country Labor members vote on the bill; certainly, their 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6687 constituents will be watching the debate closely. For decades successive governments of both political persuasions have grappled with this issue without result. This bill is an opportunity for New South Wales to move forward and actually catch up with neighbouring States, especially Queensland. The Shires Association of New South Wales can take much of the credit for this bill. Numerous comments have been made about the impact of heavy vehicles on country roads and concern expressed over their impact on road and bridge infrastructure. The position taken by local government on this issue has been open to much speculation. Last year's annual conference of the Shires Association passed motion No. 80, which stated:
That the Shires Association supports the introduction of Mass Limit Management guidelines for the transport of livestock and containerised export commodities within NSW.
That is a positive step and is welcome support for this bill. There has been a great deal of goodwill across many diverse groups, including support from local government, the New South Wales Farmers Association, the Stock and Station Agents Association, and the Livestock and Bulk Carriers Association together with rural and regional communities directly involved in and affected by the transport industry. Therefore, I hope that the Government will consider this bill constructively and pursue the very reasonable objective of putting in place a set of guidelines that is consistent across all States. The honourable member for Northern Tablelands made an excellent point in his second reading speech. One of his predecessors, Sir Henry Parkes, emphasised that State boundaries should not get in the way of a good outcome for the entire country. That is exactly what is happening here. New South Wales is being disadvantaged by having to operate under legislation that best suits conditions of the previous century, or even the one before. The honourable member for Northern Tablelands was of the view that Sir Henry Parkes would have supported this view, and I agree with that assumption.
The proposals in the bill require much more attention than successive governments have given to them in the past. Every State, apart from New South Wales, has been proactive in enacting legislation to ensure a good outcome for everyone. Every other State in Australia has seen the way clear to improve the quality of life for farmers and transport operators by negotiating good outcomes for all the relevant players. That is the responsibility of this Parliament. My constituents and those represented by my Independent colleagues representing the Northern Tablelands, Dubbo and Port Macquarie electorates all have a strong interest in this matter.
Mr David Barr: And Manly.
Mr PETER DRAPER: And Manly indeed. This bill will influence the livelihoods of people across the State. That is why I am interested to see the level of support from the main players, that is, the Country Labor people. The bill should be examined on its merits in a non-partisan way. The honourable member for Northern Tablelands said in his second reading speech that he sought suggestions or amendments from both sides of the House. I would be interested to know how many members have done that. There appears to have been little discussion on the bill so I assume that it meets with the approval of both sides of the House. There has been plenty of opportunity for a thorough examination. We should focus on the issues this bill addresses and not the politics. That is what has prevented New South Wales from achieving a good outcome in the past.
Common features proposed in the bill are that trucks should be allowed to carry greater payloads, subject to the installation of road-friendly suspension—and I emphasise that―with a form of accreditation, and that these vehicles operate on approved roads in approved areas. The suggestion that this will affect our road infrastructure is complete nonsense. Permissions to operate under the legislation are conditional, and there are strict obligations that participants must meet, which is particularly appropriate. The bill has the additional safeguard that the commission is subject to approval by the relevant council bodies. That, too, is appropriate
The bill introduces the need to consult, seek approvals and upgrade infrastructure appropriately. The proposals will reduce transport costs, thereby bringing trucks and road transport into line with other competing alternative transport options, which will make them more productive. Road wear and tear will be reduced because of the introduction of road-friendly suspension but they will not compromise any of the infrastructure assets in New South Wales, especially bridges, because truck transport will be limited to appropriate weight- bearing bridges.
The legislation will improve safety because there will be fewer trucks on the road. Fewer trucks will mean fewer accidents and less wear and tear on the road infrastructure. Relationships between the trucking industry, regulators and the broader community will improve as a direct result of this legislation. It will help us to have a more efficient, safer industry that will operate within an accreditation framework and ensure that the highest standards of road safety are achieved. New South Wales is the only State without this type of legislation. 6688 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
It will help to attract industry and jobs back to inland and regional New South Wales—a concept that successive State governments have claimed to support for many years. We, as lawmakers, should support and reward employers who are prepared to invest in regional and rural New South Wales, particularly in inland areas where population drift has been a point of discussion for many years. [Extension of time agreed to.]
By supporting the bill we will support farmers and transport operators, and help them continue to support their local communities and employ country people. Many examples have been quoted of the lower costs and improved job opportunities that would flow from lower transport costs. The honourable member for Northern Tablelands pointed out that net returns to primary producers are broadly equivalent to transport costs beyond the farm gate. The 10 per cent improvement in transport costs would increase returns by about the same proportion. It is a simple way of increasing returns to farmers. The farming community, which is struggling with an unfavourable exchange rate and a prolonged drought, would most certainly welcome an increased return of 10 per cent across the board.
We should consider this bill as an opportunity to provide the people of New South Wales with safe and efficient road transport, and as a result build a platform for improved job opportunities in regional and rural New South Wales. The road transport industry operates under antiquated legislation. The bill provides us with an opportunity to move forward and to open up opportunities for the industry to be more productive, yet increase safety and animal-handling conditions. We seem to do too many things that put barriers in the way of transport operators trying to earn a decent living. We should consider the bill as a chance for the Government to improve the opportunities for our farming community, as well as give truckies a fair go against interstate competitors.
We should put in place the changes that are already in place in other States. I seek bipartisan support for the bill. It should receive a genuine examination on its merits. Politics should be left out of the decision- making process, and total consideration given to the issues the bill deals with. The maximum increases the bill details are not excessive. It increases the gross mass limit by 7.5 per cent or the regulation axle mass limit by 10 per cent. Vehicles operate safely and efficiently in other States under similar legislation. The Minister indicated a willingness to discuss the issues raised in the bill, and I hope he has seriously looked at the benefits to New South Wales that would flow from it. I commend the bill highly, and I recommend it to the House.
Mr THOMAS GEORGE (Lismore) [10.41 a.m.]: The object of the Road Transport Efficiency Bill is to provide for the establishment of schemes to enable certain vehicles to exceed current mass limits on a restricted and conditional basis if the vehicles are carrying livestock or grain, or have a road-friendly suspension system. The scheme corresponds to arrangements operating elsewhere in Australia, which is very important. The honourable member for the Northern Tablelands introduced the bill. The Deputy Leader of The Nationals, the honourable member for Ballina, indicated up front that we will vote for the bill. I am very disappointed that the Government will not support it. Country areas, indeed the whole State, need a more efficient transport system. Where does Country Labor stand on this issue? The Parliamentary Secretary at the table, the honourable member for Tweed, is a member of Country Labor. I will be very interested to see how he votes on this issue.
The Coalition has long recognised that the efficient transport of freight by road and rail is integral to the social and economic wellbeing of country communities. That freight load is expected to double over the next 16 years. We must ensure that the industry is able to meet this demand safely and efficiently. Every other State in Australia has a grain harvest scheme. The bill will increase safety and efficiency, and will save the grain and livestock industry an estimated 10 per cent per annum, or at least $400 million, in transport costs. The object of the bill—the introduction of higher mass limits, and creation of a livestock loading and grain harvest truck loading scheme of approved routes—is very similar to the Coalition policy that the former shadow Minister for Roads, the honourable member for Myall Lakes, took to the last election on behalf of The Nationals.
Studies undertaken in Australia show that typical road wear from a six-axle articulated truck is reduced by 20 per cent with road-friendly suspensions. We support road-friendly suspensions, such as approved spring and air suspensions, which will reduce road impact as well as enhance safety. An accreditation scheme will ensure route and loading integrity. The New South Wales Livestock and Bulk Carriers Association has quite rightly dubbed New South Wales the last innovator as a result of the Carr Labor Government's failure to introduce a more efficient system for the transport of livestock. The current restrictions are inflexible. They fail completely to account for the difficulties of accurately estimating livestock weights. In turn this results in higher costs for livestock producers and places livestock processing industries, such as abattoirs, at a significant disadvantage to interstate competitors.
The Nationals are committed to the introduction of a new scheme for the transport of livestock in New South Wales based on the loading of livestock according to volume and preset deck lengths. Stringent 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6689 restrictions must limit maximum trailer length, weight and height, and maximum vehicle tare and mass, while the maximum number of animals will be controlled by animal welfare codes and regulations. A livestock loading scheme will recognise that the weight of livestock is difficult to estimate, and it will facilitate greater certainty and load compliance for transporters. These savings will be good news for livestock producers because transport costs will be reduced. The Nationals and Liberals will support the industry in its development of a livestock-loading accreditation process to maximise safety. Under the legislation New South Wales livestock processing industries, such as abattoirs and livestock transporters, will at last receive the efficiency benefits that their competitors in neighbouring States currently enjoy.
Earlier I noticed that Robert Gunning and David Anderson from the transport industry were in the gallery. It was great to see them, but, sadly, they had to attend a 10.30 a.m. meeting with Country Labor. This week Joe Sepos, the manager of the family trucking company Stocktrans, lost his wife, Narelle. I am sure I pass on the condolences of all members of the livestock and freight industry and members of this House who know the Sepos family and assure them our prayers and thoughts are with them.
The processing and livestock industry need the benefits of lower costs in this State. In September last year I received a letter from the Northern Co-operative Meat Company, which stated that the use of a B-double trailer rather than a single rig for a C container to be transported to Brisbane from Casino would result in a $75 saving per container. It does not sound a lot, but that is the saving for only one container. If all the 1,600 containers had been shipped by B-double out of Casino last year, the company would have realised a saving of $120,000 per annum. The multiplier effect of that across the State would be huge. Sadly, current New South Wales laws do not allow them to load two standard 42,000-pound USA containers on the same rig. They are usually 2 to 4 metres over the allowable 62.5 metre maximum length. These containers account for approximately 66 per cent of containers.
One major customer of the Northern Co-operative Meat Company advises that the savings on live cattle movement prior to slaughter is similar. Again, the use of B-doubles allows a truck to maximise its freight capacity and reduce the per kilogram cost of transportation in a similar ratio. The direct route to truck cattle from Roma to the Casino abattoirs is 670 kilometres, but a B-double has to travel 900 kilometres to get to the same abattoir. If B-doubles were able to use the same route, which they cannot at the moment, the saving per head would be $19, or $1,000 per load. The saving would be astronomical if B-doubles could use the direct route, when one considers the number of loads per week that come from Queensland into the Casino abattoirs. That would be a saving for the processing industry, would make the Northern Co-operative Meat Company much more competitive against its Queensland counterparts, and would help producers in this State and other States. Another letter received from Cassino RSM Processing plant at Booyong indicated further problems. The letter stated:
With some of these arterial roads into Booyong only allowing 4.3 metre high stock crates in, it will become a major issue to Booyong as local pigs could by-pass us and go into Queensland.
Robert Eastwell, a carrier, said that twice in the past couple of months he has been fined for using these arterial roads, at a cost of approximately $1,000 per time. If this continues he will not be transporting livestock to Booyong. Mr Eastwell also said that Lismore had given him a two-month interim permit to use the roads in the shire, but that Ballina has not done so to date. I refer to another letter that was sent to me by a major piggery in Queensland that uses the Booyong abattoir and the services of the Northern Co-operative Meat Co Ltd in Casino. Cefn Pty Ltd has three piggeries with a production of 2,500 sows. The company, which sells about 1,000 pigs a week, is located within a 50-kilometre radius of Toowoomba, which has pig abattoirs in the area. However, it sends pigs over four to five days to the Northern Co-operative Meat Company facility at Booyong, which involves travelling for five hours one way. The letter stated:
We are experiencing difficulties with regards to the restrictions being enforced on livestock haulage from our home State of Queensland into New South Wales crossing at the Tweed Heads border. The two issues are different regulations with height of stock trailers and weights of loads.
The carrier loads one trailer and then travels for four hours, including one hour in New South Wales, and he has two problems. One is the trailer height and the other is the weight of the load. Once he gets to the border he has only 80 kilometres to travel and he is supposed to stop and unload some of the pigs because his load is too heavy under the New South Wales rules, and the truck is too high. What is this gentleman to do? He is affected in three ways. The letter stated:
• Economically this would increase our freight costs by approximately $62,500 per annum. • Even at these reduced numbers, it is not always possible to have a clear indication of weights being loaded as pigs growth rate prior to slaughter age can be 1kg/day. 6690 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Anyone who knows livestock knows that there is a variation in weight. The letter continued:
However, due to standard quarantine protocols and the overall health of pigs, with regards to climate conditions, once trucks have left the farm, they cannot be returned to reduce the number of animals being loaded.
Again we have an animal welfare problem. The letter further stated:
• This varying weight also leads to concerns with weight distribution over axles. Animals are loaded into the pens on trucks in accordance with their destination markets which have varying weight and muscle limits. (Currently we are delivering to do domestic markets and won Singapore's export market--all animals slaughtered at Booyong) …
Cefn is currently on track towards quite an extensive expansion program that will see our number of animals being slaughtered increase by 540 animals per week. Economics would then suggest to have a B Double haul our loads, which then raises a separate issue of B Double access currently being unavailable on route to Booyong abattoir.
So all industries that use trucks to transport freight are having problems. While on the transport industry, I shall touch on other impediments for the trucking industry in New South Wales that give interstate competitors an advantage over the industry in this State. These problems force businesses out of New South Wales. Not only is it a problem with mass limits, but there are other problems with payroll tax and workers compensation. For example, a typical rural trucking business in New South Wales pays 9.3 per cent of wages for workers compensation. In contrast, the same business would pay 3.58 per cent in Queensland. That is another impediment experienced by the industry in New South Wales.
The Carr Government's failure to even consider efficiency reforms such as mass limits, a grain harvesting scheme and volumetric loading for the transport of livestock has placed New South Wales transporters, primary producers and industries at a disadvantage to interstate competitors. Overall, the rural trucking industry needs to find ways of working productively with the Carr Government and Parliament to remove impediments to doing business in New South Wales, thereby creating jobs and delivering efficiencies to customers. We need to achieve this yesterday, and we need to provide support not only to livestock carriers but also the trucking industry in New South Wales. I call on Country Labor to support this bill and to listen to the Livestock and Bulk Carriers Association, Natroads and other peak industry groups, including the New South Wales Farmers Association, in supporting this much-needed reform to give the New South Wales transport industry a level playing field.
Mr RICHARD TORBAY (Northern Tablelands) [10.55 a.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members who contributed to this debate: the Parliamentary Secretary, the honourable member for Dubbo, the honourable member for Wagga Wagga, the honourable member for Tamworth, the honourable member for Ballina and the honourable member for Lismore. The debate was interesting. In my second reading speech last year I made it clear that I proposed this bill in good faith. Simply, the industry had contacted a range of people in local government and in State Parliament. Local members in the area were able to access information through the country trucking caucuses that were held throughout New South Wales. Indeed, one such meeting was held in Parliament House. I attended two caucuses and I listened to the information.
Many comments have been made about the reasons the New South Wales legislation should be brought into line with that in other States. It is not a big ask. Let us bring New South Wales into line with other mainland States in terms of the transport industry. I would have thought it was commonsense. In my second reading speech I said that the State boundaries sometimes get in the way of good policy. We have seen that in relation to transport, the railways and, as the honourable member for Lismore reminds me, a whole range of areas. If we push hard enough we might debate the legitimacy of State parliaments, but I will not go into that now. We might raise the issue of a New England State—meetings are already taking place.
I was disappointed with some of the points made by the Parliamentary Secretary in his contribution to the second reading debate on behalf of the Government. Basically, he said that the Government accepted that there are issues in the transport industry and is concerned about them. However, the old chestnut of blaming the Commonwealth for a lack of funding was brought to the table. The Parliamentary Secretary said that the Government is prepared to continue a dialogue and to negotiate with me and the industry to look at the areas of concern. Towards the end of his speech the Parliamentary Secretary detailed some of the issues. He said that the Government is unable to quantify the concerns expressed in submissions on behalf of the industry about road- friendly suspension, for example.
The Government said that it was not sure whether road-friendly suspension would have the positive impacts suggested by the industry. Submissions from the industry also stated that more work needs to be done 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6691 on the wear and tear of our roads and bridges. What will take place there? I accept that as a challenge, as I think the industry would . I had the opportunity to address the industry at a conference held in Wagga Wagga. The honourable member for Wagga Wagga also made a presentation to the conference of more than 250 people from the transport industry. The transport industry representatives tell me that they are prepared to work through the issues with the Government. They are prepared to receive details of the problems and work out some solutions. That has not happened for more than 30 years. During that time we have been debating the politics of the problems, not the problems themselves.
I will take up the challenge presented by the Parliamentary Secretary and get together a delegation. I would like to have all the Government's concerns listed in detail. I want to have constructive dialogue with the Government on those concerns. I am prepared to obtain independent advice and an independent analysis, if that is required. Let the Government submit a list of the names of people it is prepared to accept, whom the industry also will accept, to undertake investigations and effect progress of these issues instead of resorting to tired rhetoric and the politics of blame. For 30 years New South Wales has been the only State in Australia that has been out of step on these issues. It is commonsense that New South Wales should be brought into line. It is important to take on board the concerns that have been raised. Economics is not the sole criterion; surely commonsense has a place in policy that affects people who move around Australia. The policy should be consistent.
It should not be possible for someone to be obeying the law while travelling along a road at one point and to be disobeying the law if they travel two kilometres further along the road into a different jurisdiction. The example provided by the honourable member for Dubbo illustrates that such a person is in breach of the law. Currently fines and penalties are so significant that the inconsistency and the costs are forcing the industry out of New South Wales. The general advice is that people should go anywhere but New South Wales. The industry's representatives are prepared to take some medicine and to have meaningful dialogue with local government authorities in seeking approval for designated routes. They are prepared to have the impact of road- friendly suspension measured in consultation with the Government. They are prepared to come down heavily on rebels in the industry whom the industry does not support. The industry wants to work constructively towards achieving good outcomes, and there is a good deal of goodwill.
The introduction of this bill marks the progress that has been made with this whole project. It is important not to lose sight of the goodwill of the industry. Even though the Government has indicated that it will not support the bill, it is important for it to participate in working through the problems instead of playing politics. That is what I hope to achieve by this whole process. It is not just the industry that supports the bill; the New South Wales Coalition has indicated strong support for the bill also, and I was pleased to note that Opposition members concentrated on the issues during the debate instead of playing politics. At the recent conference of the Local Government and Shires Associations a resolution was passed in support of the principles of the bill. Conference participants want to have the matter sorted out and want to make sure that they can work with the industry. They also want infrastructure to be upgraded so that New South Wales is consistent with other mainland States of Australia.
The New South Wales Farmers Association solidly supports the provisions of the legislation and is apprised of research that I was not aware of, and that perhaps the industry is not aware of. The research assists in teasing out the issues so that we are debating facts, not fiction, and impacts, not politics, and that is the way to formulate good policy. As the honourable member for Tamworth pointed out in his contribution to the debate, the bill has been put forward in good faith. Debate on the issues has been constructive. The reason advanced by the Government for opposing it is wrong. Judging by the examples that have been given in support of the Government's opposition to the bill, I do not believe that the Government fully comprehends it. If the Government understood the bill, I am sure it would not oppose it.
I am eager to take up the challenge of constructively negotiating a path through the issues. The industry is also eager to undertake that process and wants to have constructive interaction with the Government. The stakeholders do not want to play the game of blame for blame's sake. They are striving to achieve good outcomes for the industry, the people of New South Wales and the wider Australian community.
Question—That this bill be now read a second time—put.
The House divided. 6692 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Ayes, 34
Mr Aplin Mrs Hopwood Mr Roberts Mr Armstrong Mr Humpherson Ms Seaton Mr Barr Mr Kerr Mr Slack-Smith Ms Berejiklian Mr McGrane Mr Souris Mr Cansdell Mr Merton Mr Stoner Mr Constance Ms Moore Mr Torbay Mr Debnam Mr Oakeshott Mr J. H. Turner Mr Draper Mr O'Farrell Mr R. W. Turner Mrs Hancock Mr Page Mr Hartcher Mr Piccoli Tellers, Mr Hazzard Mr Pringle Mr George Ms Hodgkinson Mr Richardson Mr Maguire
Noes, 45
Ms Allan Ms Hay Mr Pearce Mr Amery Mr Hickey Mr Price Ms Andrews Mr Hunter Mr Sartor Mr Black Mr Iemma Mr Scully Mr Brown Ms Judge Mr Shearan Ms Burney Ms Keneally Mr Stewart Miss Burton Mr Knowles Mr Tripodi Mr Collier Mr Lynch Mr Watkins Mr Corrigan Mr McBride Mr West Mr Crittenden Ms Meagher Mr Whan Ms D'Amore Ms Megarrity Mr Yeadon Mr Debus Mr Mills Ms Gadiel Mr Morris Tellers, Mr Gaudry Mr Newell Mr Ashton Mr Gibson Mr Orkopoulos Mr Martin Mr Greene Mrs Paluzzano
Pairs
Mr Brogden Mr Bartlett Mr Fraser Mr Carr Mr Tink Ms Saliba
Question resolved in the negative.
Motion negatived.
STATE ARMS, SYMBOLS AND EMBLEMS BILL
Second Reading
Debate resumed from 28 October 2003.
Mr PAUL LYNCH (Liverpool) [11.13 a.m.]: The real issue in the debate on this bill is whether we are English or Australian. Those of us who are Australian will support the bill; those who really regard themselves as English will oppose it. Naturally, I support the bill. It is in fact an eminently reasonable, sensible and moderate proposal. Opposition members who behaved with such illogical buffoonery when the issue was raised before and vehemently opposed it are either knowingly overstating the case or are so intellectually inadequate that they do not understand the bill. The most significant part of the bill is to discontinue using the Royal coat of arms of what is called the United Kingdom in relation to the New South Wales Parliament, our courts, the office of State Governor and State instrumentalities. Instead the New South Wales State arms will be used.
At a very simple and obvious level it is impossible to logically argue against this. We are not part of what is called the United Kingdom; we are New South Wales, part of Australia, not the United Kingdom or 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6693
England. It follows that we should, when we display a coat of arms, display the New South Wales State arms. It is simply a matter of logic. It is also a matter of practice. As the Parliamentary Secretary made clear on behalf of the Government in the debate, it coincides with present government policy to install and display the State arms in public buildings. It is also consistent with the Federal position: the current Commonwealth Government uses the Commonwealth arms, without any objection, in the Federal Parliament and in the various Commonwealth courts—the High Court of Australia, the Federal Court and the Family Court.
It is also consistent with the practice in this very Chamber, the Legislative Assembly. The new crest of the Legislative Assembly no longer has the crown on it. That is a sensible and modern step that is consistent with the bill. It also has been in operation for many months and has provoked no noticeable problems. The sun still rises, our institutions have continued and the Opposition, to my knowledge, has uttered not a peep. The proposal would also be consistent with what I think in the future will be an inevitable change—the alteration of our oath of allegiance.
Unlike some other people participating in this debate, I do not spend a lot of my time peering over the intricacies of heraldic design and discovering the apparent joy of a coat of arms. But I must say that I find the United Kingdom Royal coat of arms a bit odd. It is not just that we are New South Wales and not England, but the arms of what is laughingly called the United Kingdom have a number of contradictions and incongruities. First, the kingdom is not terribly united: there are now devolved assemblies in Scotland and Wales. Union there, historically, came on the back of conquest and bloodshed. Then we come to the absurdity of the harp on the Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom, which purports to represent Ireland. To many Irish Australians that is deeply offensive.
The union of Ireland with England came only after much repression and bloodshed following the 1798 United Irish Rebellion and the tawdry bribery of the Ascendancy Parliament. It generated 200 years of repression. Following the war of Irish independence and the treaty, 26 of the 32 counties left the United Kingdom. So if the crest that the Opposition is defending in this place had any reality to it then it would have only 18 per cent of the harp on it rather than the full harp. May I dare suggest that with the Good Friday Agreement and the imminent appointment of Gerry Adams or Martin McGuinness as Deputy First Minister of the Stormont Assembly the 18 per cent might no longer be there.
Indeed, in what I would still call English-occupied Ireland there is a very real chance that England will have its links well and truly severed, which makes the coat of arms even more absurd. Not only is the United Kingdom Royal arms the wrong coat of arms for us because we are Australians; it is the wrong coat of arms because it is internally inconsistent and riven by those historical and logical contradictions. I turn briefly to the arguments in opposition to the bill. They are not terribly substantial so we do not need to take much time on them. The intellectually substantive argument against the bill involves why we are bothering to take so much time on this.
I must say that I was surprised at the amount of time the Opposition took opposing the bill when it was last before the House. If Opposition members had not got so excited I probably would not have made this contribution. But you can hardly blame the proponents of the bill if, after they succinctly and logically put a case, their opponents rabbit on at great length and take a great deal of time about it. The other response to the argument about why we should bother is simply that symbols are important. It is a significant issue. It says something about our sense of identity, and we ought to get our identity right. We should make sure that it is an Australian identity and not an English identity. Of course, that is the intellectually substantive opposition to the bill. That is not what the Opposition put on the last occasion the issue was before the House.
Its rhetorically substantive argument was that the change would destroy our heritage and our history. That was most floridly—and, may I say, stupidly—put by the honourable member for Lachlan, supported by equally asinine contributions from the honourable member for Cronulla, the honourable member for Wakehurst and the honourable member for Lane Cove. As someone who cares deeply about our heritage and history I find the arguments offensive. The first question that arises in response to the Opposition's arguments is: Whose heritage? The heritage that is defended by the Opposition in this debate is an exclusivist, white, foreign heritage. It does not include the inhabitants of this island continent before 1788. That was a point properly and fairly made by the honourable member for Wallsend when the matter was last debated. But it does not end there.
As a description of our heritage the Royal United Kingdom coat of arms was flawed from the earliest days of European settlement. That heritage was challenged militarily in 1804 at Vinegar Hill, an event whose bicentenary we celebrate next weekend. Many of the first European settlers were Irish rebels who fought 6694 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004 against, and whose comrades were killed by, the English Crown, whose coat of arms supposedly represents all Australians. We could go on and on with those sorts of examples of how the heritage that is defended by the Opposition simply is the very narrow, white, exclusivist heritage and has nothing to do with real Australia.
I turn to some of the things said in the previous debate, the mistakes and absurdities by various members of the Opposition. The honourable member for Cronulla referred to Charles I entering Parliament to arrest members before the Tudor period. Perhaps he should go back to high school to find out that the Tudor period actually predated Charles I. It really does pay to look at Hansard: one finds the most extraordinary things. The honourable member then went on to tie the enfranchisement of the population to the English civil war. Even a Kellogg's Cornflakes packet version of history would not make that sort of egregious error. Enfranchisement came well over 200 years after the English Civil War. The really interesting argument of the honourable member for Cronulla was that he linked the United Kingdom coat of arms and our heritage to the struggle for parliamentary reforms and parliamentary supremacy over the monarch. In fact, the very opposite is true: the coat of arms that he defended, and the rest of the Opposition defended, was the Royal coat of arms.
If members of this House want to defend our parliamentary heritage and our parliamentary institution they ought to support this bill and get rid of the representative of the monarchy. It is quite interesting when one follows the arguments of the Opposition through to their logical conclusion; they end up supporting the proposition that this bill ought to be supported. The Royal coat of arms, putting it anachronistically, represents Charles I, not Cromwell. It is quite bizarre to argue that somehow or other parliamentary democracy is enshrined in a Royal coat of arms. For those reasons, amongst many others, I am delighted to support the bill.
Ms CLOVER MOORE (Bligh) [11.20 a.m.], in reply: I agree with the honourable member for Liverpool that symbols are important and that our identity is important. I also join with him in rejecting the misrepresentation and the nonsense that we heard when this bill was last debated. We were told then that the State Arms, Symbols and Emblems Bill would be the end of the world as we know it, including the Westminster system. The honourable member for Liverpool has dealt with that very adequately. The hysterical misrepresentation of the Coalition is probably a new experience for members elected in March 2003, but I can tell them that it gets wheeled out in this House whenever any progressive legislation is put before it—so be prepared.
The aim of this bill is to ensure that the State arms of New South Wales are used to represent the authority of this State. There is no proposal to change the State arms, symbols or emblems of New South Wales. As the honourable member for Liverpool has pointed out, the Royal arms of the United Kingdom represent the dominion and sovereignty of the country. New South Wales, which is a separate sovereign entity within the Commonwealth of Australia, has had its own coat of arms since 1906, when King Edward VII assigned the arms by way of royal warrant for "the honour and distinction" of the State.
The High Court held in 1999 that, at the very latest, the Commonwealth of Australia was transformed into a sovereign, independent nation with the enactment of the Australia Act in 1986, and the United Kingdom is now a foreign power for the purpose of the Australian Constitution. This confirms that the State arms of New South Wales are the appropriate arms to represent the authority of New South Wales. There is no current legislation effectively governing the use of State arms in New South Wales. This bill will address that omission.
The Royal arms of the United Kingdom, which represent the dominion and sovereignty of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, are displayed in both Chambers of this Parliament. This contrasts with the situation at the Commonwealth level, where the Federal Government uses the Commonwealth arms consistently and without controversy in the Federal Parliament, the High Court, the Federal Court and the Family Court.
In response to some of the heritage concerns that arose in the debate, the bill recognises that in some cases it will be appropriate to continue to display the Royal arms of the United Kingdom. Subclauses (3) to (6) of clause 5 provide important heritage conservation measures, by way of exemptions to the removal of the Royal arms, to be determined by the Premier in consultation with the Heritage Council. In that situation State arms are to be displayed in addition to Royal arms that are retained for historical reasons, and any sculpted arms or arms in durable form are to be stored, conserved or displayed as part of the constitutional, legal, cultural and artistic heritage of the State.
This bill is neither republican nor monarchist, although some members of this House probably wish it were. It has nothing to do with changing the role or perception of the Queen in Australia. The Royal arms of the 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6695
United Kingdom are historically significant, but they do not represent our separate Crown, our separate people, our separate laws and our separate freedoms. The bill will not remove our historic symbols. It contains strong heritage conservation measures. I thank my constituent Richard d'Apice, who is in the House today, and Peter Breen of the Legislative Council, for their work on this bill. I commend the bill to the House.
Question—That this bill be now read a second time—put.
The House divided.
Ayes, 50
Ms Allan Ms Hay Mr Orkopoulos Mr Amery Mr Hickey Mrs Paluzzano Ms Andrews Mr Hunter Mr Pearce Mr Barr Mr Iemma Mr Price Mr Black Ms Judge Mr Sartor Mr Brown Ms Keneally Mr Scully Ms Burney Mr Knowles Mr Shearan Miss Burton Mr Lynch Mr Stewart Mr Collier Mr McBride Mr Torbay Mr Corrigan Mr McGrane Mr Tripodi Mr Crittenden Ms Meagher Mr Watkins Ms D'Amore Ms Megarrity Mr West Mr Debus Mr Mills Mr Whan Mr Draper Ms Moore Mr Yeadon Mr Gaudry Mr Morris Tellers, Mr Gibson Mr Newell Mr Ashton Mr Greene Mr Oakeshott Mr Martin
Noes, 29
Mr Aplin Ms Hodgkinson Ms Seaton Mr Armstrong Mrs Hopwood Mrs Skinner Ms Berejiklian Mr Humpherson Mr Slack-Smith Mr Cansdell Mr Kerr Mr Souris Mr Constance Mr Merton Mr Stoner Mr Debnam Mr O'Farrell Mr J. H. Turner Mr Fraser Mr Page Mr R.W. Turner Mrs Hancock Mr Piccoli Tellers, Mr Hartcher Mr Pringle Mr George Mr Hazzard Mr Richardson Mr Maguire
Pairs
Mr Bartlett Mr Brogden Mr Carr Mr Roberts Ms Saliba Mr Tink
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Motion agreed to.
Bill read a second time and passed through remaining stages.
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted.
LOCAL COUNCIL AMALGAMATIONS
Mr ANDREW FRASER (Coffs Harbour) [11.34 a.m.]: I move:
That this House condemns the Government over the forced amalgamation of four councils in the Clarence Valley and other proposed forced amalgamations in New South Wales. 6696 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Yesterday we witnessed another arrogant act from an arrogant Minister and an arrogant Government. In spite of popular resistance in the Clarence Valley, the Government forcibly amalgamated four Clarence Valley councils into one. Grafton City Council was the only council to support this move. The other three councils affected, which protested long and loudly both publicly and during the so-called regional review, were not listened to. In fact, David Simmons, a Labor mate and former Federal Minister, who conducted the review, ignored 480 submissions from the people of Maclean. The election of the new council will be delayed for 12 months.
Copmanhurst shire was becoming unviable because of a lack of government funding, and the mayor of Copmanhurst has been appointed administrator of the new council. He is a great bloke and will do a good job. However, he lives outside the two major centres of Grafton and Maclean-Yamba. The Government has appointed Ken Boyle as the acting general manager. He comes from Broken Hill. He is reported in today's newspaper as saying that the council amalgamation was a positive step for the region. How the hell does he know that when he does not come from the region? He continued:
I think the idea certainly has a lot of merit and I really think it should have been considered years ago.
Again, how the hell would he know? Those comments tell me that Mr Boyle is no more than a Labor Party appointee who will do the Government's bidding. He has no knowledge of the local area or of local nuances and issues from the upper valley to the coast. He went on:
I can certainly see a big chance for the growth of tourism in the area. Getting people to the area, getting them to stay longer and that kind of thing. (But) I really need more time to get to the area and have a good look around and decide on what to do.
This bloke has been appointed general manager of the new council. It is absolutely laughable. I challenge the Government to provide his Labor credentials because they must be good. The United Services Union [USU] will be interested in the next comment. The newspaper states:
As a minor comfort to former council staff, the general manager said the new Clarence Valley Council will attempt to retain a number of employees from the former councils.
The Government's legislation that is designed to protect jobs will not apply to these forcibly amalgamated councils. Jobs will be lost. According to our calculations based on figures supplied by Tallaganda shire, economic activity in regional New South Wales will diminish by $175 million if only the proposed amalgamations go ahead. We must remember Labor's broken election promise about no forced local government amalgamations. As the Labor candidate, the honourable member for Monaro stated publicly during the election campaign that there would be no forced amalgamations. There have been forced amalgamations in his electorate but he has defended the Government's position. I refer honourable members to the comments of the honourable member for Bathurst as reported in his local media. It states:
The Labor Member for Bathurst, Gerard Martin, conceded that the process had been "badly handled" and that most people in the council areas under threat in his electorate were opposed to forced amalgamations.
Yet the Premier stood in this place yesterday and claimed that he had not heard of anyone opposing council amalgamations in that area. That is strange because the honourable member for Bathurst is telling anyone who will listen that he raised the issue in caucus. I know that he did not. The Labor caucus is leaking badly at the moment—Labor members cannot wait to tell us who did what and who did not, especially when members have claimed to have taken particular action. I know that the honourable member for Bathurst did not raise the issue in caucus. The USU is waiting for him to provide some evidence of his representations. It is not good enough for one of his mates to say, "Oh yeah, I think he did mention it." The fact is that the honourable member did not raise that issue. It is ridiculous for the Premier to claim that he knew of no opposition. In a letter to the Western Advocate of 9 February the honourable member for Bathurst stated:
I fully support those opposed to amalgamations of Local Government taking accepted methods of protest including picketing my office. I am opposed to forced amalgamations of council. I have taken deputations to the Minister for Local Government, Tony Kelly, on the issue. I have also spoken at a number of public meetings on the subject. I have written numerous submissions and letters to Minister Kelly and Premier Carr outlining my opposition to forced amalgamation.
Yesterday the Premier said he knew of no opposition. He has misled the House or the honourable member for Bathurst has misled the people. No matter where the scream comes from, the Premier does not listen, even if it is from his own caucus. No wonder he had to deliver a 45-minute speech trying to convince caucus that he was a great bloke and that he will survive at the next election.
Mr Steve Whan: You need about an hour. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6697
Mr ANDREW FRASER: I do need an hour. I turn now to the city of Sydney and the proclamation that was made on 6 February. Minister Kelly pulled the Governor out of bed to sign the proclamation because of interlocutory action to be taken by the City of Sydney Council if a response was not received by 8.30 a.m. that day. To avoid that action the Minister asked the Governor to proclaim a new area. The preamble to the City of Sydney Act states:
In the event of any inconsistency between this Act and the principal Act, this Act shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.
The Governor has basically proclaimed that the former area of the city of Sydney will have its elections conducted under the City of Sydney Act, which requires, under sections 18A and 18B, that an enrolment letter must be sent to non-resident ratepayers 90 days prior to the election. One would assume that was done. The proclamation then states that elections for the old South Sydney City Council will be conducted under the provisions of the principal Act, the Local Government Act 1993. Once that proclamation was made, both those areas became one council: the City of Sydney Council. The Act dictates that the elections will be run in accordance with sections 18A and 18B. However, the proclamation allows for two types of elections in the city of Sydney on 27 March. I believe that is illegal and that the Minister has gone ahead without seeking advice from the Electoral Commissioner.
The City of Sydney Act should take precedence over the Local Government Act, as stated in the preamble. More than 3,000 people have been disenfranchised by the Minister's actions. As non-ratepayers they will not have an opportunity to vote in the city of Sydney local council elections. It is laughable for the Minister to claim, by implication, that a proclamation can override an Act of Parliament. Those people will continue to be disenfranchised. The Parliament needs answers and those people now covered by newly proposed city of Sydney local government area should be given an assurance that they will not be disadvantaged.
Yesterday a proclamation was made about the new Clarence-Raleigh council. Red Rock and Corindi residents woke up and found that they were no longer members of the Pristine Water Shire Council but part of the Coffs Harbour City Council. I know of two people who would like to nominate for the position of either councillor or mayor but nominations closed yesterday. Therefore, I call on the Minister to delay the Coffs Harbour City Council elections and give the people of Red Rock, Corindi, and surrounding areas—which are deemed, by proclamation, to be in the Coffs Harbour local government area—the opportunity to nominate for those council positions. The Minister has fouled his own nest by not looking at the proclamation and not considering what should result from it. [Time expired.]
Mr BRYCE GAUDRY (Newcastle—Parliamentary Secretary) [11.44 a.m.]: I move:
That the motion be amended by leaving out all words after "That" with a view to inserting instead the following words:
"this House:
(1) recognises the value of local government in New South Wales; and
(2) congratulates the Government on the success of the local government reform program in creating financially stronger councils that are better able to serve ratepayers."
The amendment acknowledges the Government's desire to ensure that councils in New South Wales are strong, viable and able to deliver top-class services to their ratepayers. We value the contribution that councils make to their communities, and this amendment also recognises that. In contrast to the negativity of the Opposition, the Government is determined to work with councils to ensure that local government in New South Wales survives and remains strong.
In June last year the Premier and the Minister for Local Government put councils on notice that if they did not reform themselves, the Government would step in. Like it or not, local government is the responsibility of the State Government and it is a responsibility that we take seriously. We want the best deal for the ratepayers and residents of New South Wales. In July last year the Minister wrote to every council in New South Wales asking them to provide him with ideas on how they could improve service delivery for their ratepayers. He received all their responses. As a result, the Government has invested $2 million into boosting community consultation.
So far, four regional reviews have been held across the State: in the Australian Capital Territory, the Clarence Valley, the Peel Valley and the Albury region. The Macquarie review is currently under way. Phase two of both the Albury and inner-city regional reviews will start soon. In December last year Professor Kevin 6698 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Sproats updated his report into the boundaries of inner-city councils. That resulted in a proposal for the amalgamation of South Sydney and the city of Sydney councils. Following an extensive Boundaries Commission process, the Governor proclaimed the new amalgamated City of Sydney Council on 6 February, which will result in a one-off saving of $2 million for the new council, with ongoing savings of $7 million each year after that. On 11 February the Governor then proclaimed seven new councils in the Australian Capital Territory region.
The Boundaries Commission had recommended that Professor Daly's proposal for two so-called super councils should be adopted but, after listening to the community, the Minister went with the option that turned the 10 councils into seven. That option ensured community representation and generated one-off savings of $2.13 million, with annual savings of $1 million. I know that the honourable member for Monaro has had some positive feedback from his community that he will share with the House shortly.
Yesterday the Governor approved the amalgamation of councils in the Clarence Valley, creating the Clarence Valley Council, which will result in a one-off saving of more than $5 million, with yearly savings of $1.5 million. There are huge financial benefits for councils that reform, and those savings can be put into services for the community. After all, the purpose of this program is to make sure that ratepayers get the best deal from their councils. These examples alone prove our case for reforming local government. The Government is conducting the biggest reform program in history. Some of these boundaries were established in the nineteenth century. In fact, the boundaries of the former councils in the Clarence Valley were nearly 150 years old. Obviously, this State has come a long way since then and the boundaries of our councils should reflect that.
In 1906 New South Wales had 327 councils; yesterday it had 165. Local government reform always generates hot local debate. Sir William McKell's reform program turned 43 councils into only 17. Reform inevitably means better services for ratepayers and stronger, financially viable councils. Reform is not only about boundary changes, as the Opposition would have us believe. Councils were asked to develop innovative ideas to better serve their residents and ratepayers. We know that one size does not fit all: bigger is not always better. For example, it would be ridiculous to amalgamate Bourke shire with its neighbour. Would the improvement in service benefit ratepayers if they had to travel up to four hours to pay their rates? The tyranny of distance faced by some councils means that boundary changes or amalgamations are not appropriate.
I am pleased to say that some councils have developed solid ideas about how to improve service delivery. Councils in the Central West and the north-west of the State have formed strategic alliances that formalise resource sharing and cut costs for councils. For our part we have encouraged and supported councils in any of their ideas that make ratepayers the winners. Councils realise that we are serious about reform. We have on the books voluntary amalgamation proposals affecting eight councils in New South Wales. I understand that others are discussing it with their neighbours.
Only last night I saw reports that the mayor of Holbrook is talking to Culcairn shire about a voluntary amalgamation. In June last year councils were warned that if they did not look seriously at reform the Government would step in. Like it or not, local government is the responsibility of the State, and we have shown clearly that we take this responsibility seriously. We are determined to ensure that local government in New South Wales provides efficient and equitable services to their community. We will continue with our reform program because it is in the best interests of the ratepayers of New South Wales. I commend the amendment.
Mr STEVE CANSDELL (Clarence) [11.52 a.m.]: Whether or not one supports the amalgamation of councils one can be only disappointed by the process, which has been flawed right from the start. I use the Clarence Valley councils as an example. If four corporate bodies with a total yearly budget of $60 million were to merge, the first thing one would expect is that a business plan would be laid at the feet of the directors to enable shareholders to understand exactly what they were getting—the benefits, the losses, the lot—and to make an informed decision. If such a plan were not provided the organisations involved could find themselves before the Independent Commission Against Corruption for corporate negligence. Nothing is any different here. The lack of proper consultation and a socioeconomic impact study to highlight the benefits, job losses and advantages of any amalgamation has left people in the dark and has raised suspicion.
Councils are blaming one another. That was a strategic ploy by the Premier and the Minister for Local Government: take a step back from forced amalgamations and let councils fight each other and blame each other—community against community. It has been extremely divisive. The summary dismissal of the many hard-working democratically elected councillors in the Clarence Valley is insulting. The Minister should have complied with section 218 F of the Act, which requires a 40-day consultation process, together with a poll of all 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6699 residents. The whole process was rushed. Yesterday the Minister admitted on radio 2GF Grafton that Red Rock- Corindi may have been a mistake, or that Grafton City will have to negotiate with Coffs Harbour because perhaps the people did not want amalgamation. The consultation process took place midweek for an hour outside a local store. If people walked past they spoke to the administrator. People in the Clarence, Red Rock- Corindi and Maclean are upset. There was public consultation, but their voices were completely ignored. I attended one meeting at Maclean where the ratepayers were overwhelmingly against any amalgamation.
Mr Andrew Fraser: 700 people.
Mr STEVE CANSDELL: That is right, 700 people attended. The people who attended the meeting were as much anti amalgamation as they were anti forced amalgamation. Their concerns resulted in a split among neighbouring councils. One council blames the other as the takeover council, and that has created a great deal of division. It will be difficult to resolve those feelings in the next 12 months prior to the local election. This morning I received a number of phone calls from local residents who are concerned about the impact of amalgamation on their representation for the next 12 months. The proprietors of a local supermarket in Maclean were lobbying council to approve a development application that would provide strong benefits for the ratepayers, the developer and the community as a whole. If approval is not forthcoming within the next few months it appears that the supermarket will move to larger premises elsewhere. I deplore this flawed process. I condemn the Government for its actions.
Mr STEVE WHAN (Monaro) [11.57 a.m.]: It is a pleasure to support the Government's amendment to the motion. The amendment highlights the Carr Government's belief in the importance of local government. Because we believe that local government and the services it provides to ratepayers are important we have encouraged councils to try to work out future boundaries that will make them viable and more able to deliver services. Recently a number of councils in the region I represent, Monaro, amalgamated. The Queanbeyan City Council presented a submission to take over part of the Yarrowlumla Shire Council, which presented a submission to create a large shire taking in Yass, Queanbeyan and Braidwood. Many people called it the super shire. I was pleased that the Minister rejected the super shire proposal because almost every council in the area and the vast majority of the members of the public who contacted me opposed it.
The boundaries the Minister implemented have generally received positive support from the community. Not everyone will be satisfied, but the Minister has listened to people in the community. Queanbeyan City Council applied for additional land to expand, and it has indicated it is happy with the proposal. Residents of the Bungendore area told me that they did not want to amalgamate with Queanbeyan because they felt it would be better to be associated with other rural centres. Queanbeyan is now part of what is being called the Eastern Capital Region Shire, as is Braidwood. People in Sutton told me that they wanted to be amalgamated with Yass, because it would give Yass greater control over their catchment and enable them to ensure that they were managing development in their catchment well.
Since the announcement Geoff Strang, the President of the Sutton District Community Association, has been heard on the radio welcoming the new shire boundaries. The community got what it wanted. Along with other councillors, the Yass shire mayor has been on the radio saying that he welcomes the reform. Michelago residents told me that they wanted to be in one shire; they were previously divided. The new proposal puts them in Cooma-Monaro. Again, local residents have told me that that is what they wanted. Cooma-Monaro shire has written to the Minister. The administrator for Cooma-Monaro Council, Tony Kaltoum, who is a former mayor, wrote to the Minister stating:
First of all, I am honoured that you have chosen me as Administrator.
I thank you very much for your decision to increase Cooma-Monaro Shire as this will make our Shire more viable for our future.
I also thank you for listening to us and appreciate all your efforts on our behalf. The decision that you have made has strengthened my faith in you and your Government. I think that the people of our region should be grateful for your decision.
I look forward to working with you in the future.
Mr Andrew Fraser: This is the Labor Party member.
Mr STEVE WHAN: The mayor of Cooma is not a Labor Party member and never has been, to my knowledge. One interesting aspect of this debate is the way the shadow Minister slandered and bagged councils in country New South Wales. We all remember him coming into the House and telling us that Queanbeyan City Council had a debt when in fact it has $40 million in reserves. Indeed, the mayor of Queanbeyan wrote a letter 6700 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004 to all members of this House stating that the shadow Minister's comments demonstrated his unsuitability even for the shadow ministry. It was a scathing letter about an incompetent shadow Minister. The residents of Braidwood told me that they believed the super shire was not an option. Many Braidwood residents were opposed to amalgamation but a large number of them, including council staff, were interested in being part of a larger shire with Bungendore.
Mr Thomas George: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. Can the honourable member for Monaro clarify whether it is the same member who asked people—
Mr DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The honourable member for Lismore will resume his seat.
Mr STEVE WHAN: The Nationals have trouble doing what they say they do, which is representing the views of people in country New South Wales. We have heard the views expressed by the majority of councils in our area that support these new boundaries. I have heard the phone calls and seen the letters that came to my office stating that people would prefer this sort of arrangement. Obviously, it is impossible to satisfy everyone. Yarrowlumla council would like to have a super shire, but I do not believe that was supported. However, it played a positive role in the process. Out of the process we now have an outcome that is supported by the majority of people in our region. [Time expired.]
Mr GEORGE SOURIS (Upper Hunter) [12.02 p.m.]: The New South Wales Labor Government is deluding itself if it thinks that it should congratulate itself on the reform process—it even has the hide to call it reform—in local government. This is a centralisation of government, the likes of which we have never seen in the history of New South Wales. One of the greatest social issues confronting Australia today is the depopulation of country areas and the centralisation of the population, particularly in the metropolises. Centralisation and its flow-on multiplier economic effects are denuding country centres of vital services that have been provided wholesomely by local government. Removal of local government creates a bow wave of impacts in the local community that cascade into a loss of services and employment. In particular, the whole community is greatly diminished.
I thought one great imperative in economic policy in Australia was regional development and decentralisation. Yet this reform is centralisation. Country areas have suffered greatly at the hands of this Labor Government. First, the Department of Education and Training was centralised, although it had previously been decentralised effectively, to regional offices managed by an assistant director-general with significant local powers. That was a good structure for education. Centralisation took many jobs out of country New South Wales. The centralisation of electricity county councils resulted in the loss of 2,000 jobs. The hospital board structure was also centralised, as was the Department of Roads. And on it goes!
One of the Government's first acts was to merge the Department of Conservation and Land Management and the Department of Water Resources, reducing the number of regional directorates from 13 to six. That resulted in significant job losses. About 10,000 jobs have been lost in country New South Wales as a result of the Government's direct centralisation policies. I cannot imagine how many more jobs will be lost as a result of this so-called reform that the Government acclaims to the world is of such great benefit to country New South Wales. What is the benefit? The Government has not prosecuted the case. Government members are not out in the community selling the reform; they are not in the community letterbox dropping; and they are not out in the community convincing people that the centralisation of local government, the abolition of local government in rural areas, will provide benefits. One thing that will characterise this forced amalgamation process, which breaks the Government's promise fabulously, is that it will result in job losses. These so-called reforms―what a misnamed attribute!
Mr Steve Whan: Point of order: I ask the honourable member for upper Hunter to withdraw the reflection he has made on the Minister that the Minister's decision will result in job losses, when the Minister has guaranteed the future of jobs in all the communities that will be affected. For clarification, the point of order is that the honourable member has reflected on the Minister and his decision.
Mr GEORGE SOURIS: Madam Acting-Speaker—
Madam ACTING-SPEAKER (Ms Marie Andrews): Order! I have not yet ruled on the point of order. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6701
Mr GEORGE SOURIS: I am speaking to the point of order. I will take one minute and 12 seconds on the point of order to prevent further interruptions. The point of order taken by the honourable member for Monaro was simply a political interruption, and he should be ashamed of himself. The so-called reform will result in job losses. These reforms will come only from sacking people and closing administration and depots. The so-called guarantee of employment alluded to by the honourable member in his point of order is not funded. That is the point. The Government expects local government to continue to provide the same level of employment without funding it. So where are the efficiency gains proclaimed by the honourable member? He should be ashamed of himself for taking the point of order.
The reform will not provide efficiency gains; it will provide only significant losses—job cuts and closures. And those are the benefits for people in country New South Wales of this so-called reform! I must have been born with a different dictionary. The reform will have serious deleterious social impacts on country communities. In many cases those communities will never be able to recover from such impacts. Together with between 550 and 600 people, I attended a public meeting in a little town called Merriwa, which knows only too well the devastation that the Government will cause with this reform. The same can be said for Murrurundi and many other parts of New South Wales.
Mr PAUL PEARCE (Coogee) [12.07 p.m.]: I support the amendment. I bring to this debate more than 20 years involvement in local government and I am a strong supporter of local government and its autonomy. However, that must be on the basis that local government is capable of delivering the services its community needs. A number of rural shires have small population bases and revenue bases, and they are constantly undertaking basic functions, such as those of a road authority, much less any of the social demands being placed on local government.
This local government reform process was worked initially with the Local Government and Shires Association of New South Wales, and guidelines were agreed between all parties. As a sitting mayor of a municipal council, I have worked on the reform process and I have been dealing with neighbouring councils. I cite as an example of the success of the reform process the fact that finally we managed to get some rationality in terms of the boundary at Bondi Junction. The proposed boundary change was resisted tooth and nail by our neighbouring Woollahra council. Finally, during the boundaries commission inquiry the Bondi Junction boundary was moved.
It was very interesting to note the reasons for the Woollahra Municipal Council's approach. They were not based on concern about population or for the community but, rather, a cute little provision in section 94 that permitted significant funds to be ripped out of Bondi Junction's section 94 contributions and transferred to leafy park improvements at Vaucluse. The council would not put up any money for reconstruction of the Bondi Junction Mall, which Waverley Council has undertaken. That could only have happened because the boundaries were moved. Waverley Council had the support of the chamber of commerce, but its objectives were resisted by the Woollahra Municipal Council for very selfish and narrow reasons.
Listening to some people around town, one would think that amalgamations—the current example is the Council of the City of Sydney and the South Sydney City Council—date from the dark, dim days of history. The strategy in fact dates from 1988, when the then Greiner Government whipped out residential areas from the Council of the City of Sydney so that the Greiner Government could attempt to rort the boundaries and get a lord mayor to its liking. What will happen is that the residents of the city will once again be included in the city's council boundaries, so residents will have a say on developments in the central business district that have such a dramatic impact on their life. That will lead to the short-term and long-term benefit of residents of the city, although it may upset the corporate end of town and the colleagues of the Opposition, the Greens, who can survive only with the support of narrow minorities.
The points I make about the amalgamations that have taken place involving creation of the Clarence Valley council are that in the first place they were done in accordance with the provisions of the Act, which was introduced during the term of the Fahey Government by the then Minister Gerry Peacocke. In the second place there was appropriate scrutiny by the Boundaries Commission in accordance with the Act. The trouble is that The Nationals are somewhat out of touch with how local government actually works. Through the co-operation of the Local Government and Shires Associations and the Government, local government is negotiating a path of local government reform.
Reform does not necessarily mean amalgamation; it may mean working together, resource sharing and seriously considering whether, for example, a district with a population and a budget that is two-thirds the size 6702 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004 of the population and budget of Waverley Council really needs four general managers. Obviously not: There are 40,000 residents in the Clarence Valley council area and 65,000 residents in the Waverley Council area. It is about time members of the Coalition showed some support for commonsense proposals for change instead of opposing any substantial changes to the operations of local government.
Mr TONY McGRANE (Dubbo) [12.12 p.m.]: I support the motion because the Government has been totally two-faced in its approach to amalgamations of local government areas in New South Wales. However, I totally agree with voluntary amalgamations. I thought the Government would keep its word and its election promises that amalgamations would be voluntary. Local government authorities throughout New South Wales are in the best position to undertake reviews of local authority areas. I probably have had more experience in local government than has any other member of this House, with the exception of the honourable member for Murray-Darling. For 16 years I was the shire president of a small council area.
Mr Bryce Gaudry: Point of order: Time for the debate has expired.
Mr Andrew Fraser: To the point of order: I seek leave for the honourable member for Dubbo to speak in the debate.
Leave not granted.
Mr ANDREW FRASER (Coffs Harbour) [12.13 p.m.], in reply: The Parliamentary Secretary read a paltry contribution written by the Minister. He referred to perceived savings but he did not refer to the cost of precinct committees or the cost of forced redundancies and new signs.
Mr Steve Whan: There are no forced redundancies.
Mr ANDREW FRASER: There are forced redundancies. The Labor mayor of the Coffs Harbour City Council told residents of Corindi and Red Rock who will be incorporated into the Coffs Harbour City Council area that they should include in their submissions to the Boundaries Commission that they expect a huge increase in rates. They have not been told about any savings. They are being told about increased costs that will come straight back onto the ratepayers. I thank the honourable member for Clarence for his contribution to the debate. He raised the issue of forced amalgamation versus voluntary amalgamation. The honourable member for Monaro expressed support for the amended motion, but the coalition wants to know what he thinks about forced amalgamations. He did not tell us. He is trying to have it both ways. His claim that the Minister listened to constituents' concerns is laughable. He mentioned a letter written by the mayor of Queanbeyan City Council— the very same person who wrote a letter before the 2003 State election to every person in the Monaro electorate, urging them to vote for the honourable member for Monaro, Steve Whan.
Mr Steve Whan: Point of order: The member is misleading the House. The mayor of Queanbeyan City Council sent out a letter suggesting that the people of Queanbeyan vote for the person who they thought could best represent them in Government. Indeed, that was me.
Madam ACTING-SPEAKER (Ms Marie Andrews): Order! There is no point of order.
Mr ANDREW FRASER: This Government has abnegated its responsibility to ratepayers and generally to the people of New South Wales. The honourable member for Coogee referred to the size of Waverley Council's area. Let us consider the size of the proposed Northern Tablelands regional council: 16,000 square kilometres. People in Nowendoc would have to take a journey of 2½ hours to submit a development application and they would have to travel for 2½ hours to return. The trouble with so-called Country Labor members is that they do not understand the tyranny of distance in regional New South Wales. They do not understand the community of interest in local government areas. They do not understand that people want "local" in local government, not an appointed administrator. People do not want a general manager from Broken Hill appointed to an area he knows nothing about, as evidenced by today's media reports. They do not want an administrator who is concentrating on tourism instead of the timber industry, the condition of roads, agriculture and sugarcane growing.
The Government is guilty of deception because it has broken an election promise. When the Minister for Local Government, Mr Kelly, was asked a question about amalgamations at a media conference yesterday, he said, "Next question". He knows that amalgamations represent a broken election promise. He knows that a letter was sent to councils urging them to consider structural reform, but there was no mention of forced 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6703 amalgamations. I support the concept of structural reform. All honourable members agree on the need for a more effective and efficient delivery of services at all levels of government. However, this Government has blown out costs associated with the Pacific Highway upgrades by over $1 billion. The Government talks about accountability, but what a joke. There is no sign of accountability from a Government which has received the greatest revenue levels in history but is now going broke, according to the Treasurer. I move:
That the amendment be amended by leaving out paragraph (2).
If my amendment is accepted, the amended motion will read:
That this House recognises the value of local government in New South Wales.
The Coalition certainly recognises the value of local government and does not treat local government authorities with the contempt that is displayed by the Government. We recognise their contribution. The suggestion that the Government should be congratulated on the success of its reform program is not only laughable but an insult to councils that have already been sacked and those that will be sacked in the future without any benefit to residents and without taking the opinions of residents into consideration.
Question—That the amendment of the amendment be agreed to—put.
The House divided.
Ayes, 36
Mr Aplin Mrs Hopwood Mrs Skinner Mr Armstrong Mr Humpherson Mr Slack-Smith Mr Barr Mr Kerr Mr Souris Ms Berejiklian Mr McGrane Mr Stoner Mr Cansdell Mr Merton Mr Tink Mr Constance Ms Moore Mr Torbay Mr Debnam Mr Oakeshott Mr J. H. Turner Mr Draper Mr O'Farrell Mr R.W. Turner Mr Fraser Mr Page Mrs Hancock Mr Piccoli Mr Hartcher Mr Pringle Tellers, Mr Hazzard Mr Richardson Mr George Ms Hodgkinson Ms Seaton Mr Maguire
Noes, 47
Ms Allan Ms Hay Mrs Paluzzano Mr Amery Mr Hickey Mr Pearce Ms Andrews Mr Hunter Mr Price Mr Black Mr Iemma Dr Refshauge Mr Brown Ms Judge Mr Sartor Ms Burney Ms Keneally Mr Scully Miss Burton Mr Knowles Mr Shearan Mr Campbell Mr Lynch Mr Stewart Mr Collier Mr McBride Mr Tripodi Mr Corrigan Ms Meagher Mr Watkins Mr Crittenden Ms Megarrity Mr West Ms D'Amore Mr Mills Mr Whan Mr Debus Mr Morris Mr Yeadon Mr Gaudry Mr Newell Tellers, Mr Gibson Ms Nori Mr Ashton Mr Greene Mr Orkopoulos Mr Martin
Pairs
Mr Brogden Mr Bartlett Mr Roberts Ms Saliba 6704 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Question resolved in the negative.
Amendment of amendment negatived.
Question—That the amendment be agreed to—put.
The House divided.
Ayes, 47
Ms Allan Ms Hay Mrs Paluzzano Mr Amery Mr Hickey Mr Pearce Ms Andrews Mr Hunter Mr Price Mr Black Mr Iemma Dr Refshauge Mr Brown Ms Judge Mr Sartor Ms Burney Ms Keneally Mr Scully Miss Burton Mr Knowles Mr Shearan Mr Campbell Mr Lynch Mr Stewart Mr Collier Mr McBride Mr Tripodi Mr Corrigan Ms Meagher Mr Watkins Mr Crittenden Ms Megarrity Mr West Ms D'Amore Mr Mills Mr Whan Mr Debus Mr Morris Mr Yeadon Mr Gaudry Mr Newell Tellers, Mr Gibson Ms Nori Mr Ashton Mr Greene Mr Orkopoulos Mr Martin
Noes, 36
Mr Aplin Mrs Hopwood Mrs Skinner Mr Armstrong Mr Humpherson Mr Slack-Smith Mr Barr Mr Kerr Mr Souris Ms Berejiklian Mr McGrane Mr Stoner Mr Cansdell Mr Merton Mr Tink Mr Constance Ms Moore Mr Torbay Mr Debnam Mr O'Farrell Mr J. H. Turner Mr Draper Mr Oakeshott Mr R.W. Turner Mr Fraser Mr Page Mrs Hancock Mr Piccoli Mr Hartcher Mr Pringle Tellers, Mr Hazzard Mr Richardson Mr George Ms Hodgkinson Ms Seaton Mr Maguire
Pairs
Mr Bartlett Mr Brogden Ms Saliba Mr Roberts
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Amendment agreed to.
Motion as amended agreed to.
LAKE CATHIE PRIMARY SCHOOL PROPOSAL
Mr ROBERT OAKESHOTT (Port Macquarie) [12.34 p.m.]: I move:
That the Minister for Education and Training agree to build a new primary school in the Lake Cathie-Bonny Hills region of the mid North Coast as a matter of urgency. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6705
Today approximately 250 primary school-aged students in the rapidly growing coastal community of Lake Cathie will travel by bus from between 15 minutes to one hour to get to school, and will do the same at 3 o'clock this afternoon to go home. Their education and their lives, as well as their parents' lives, are being shaped by this twice-daily bus ride. The transport of these 250 children out of this growth town is an ongoing cost to the taxpayer. The initial capital funding to build a school in the area is being withheld. The withholding of these funds will not result in long-term savings because any savings will be eaten up in the transportation of the 250 students. Therefore, the economics are compelling in support of a new school.
As well as the dry economics aspect, there is the important social issue of the provision of education to a growing community. Areas such as Lake Cathie and Bonny Hills should not be penalised for growing. The Government does not recognise that the need for a school in this region will only get stronger and more urgent. Rather than starting a planning process now and committing to real dollars and time frames, the Government is continually reviewing the matter and doing all it can to delay and stall. Why are the 100-odd children at the Cathie Kids play group and similar local playgroups in our area not being given a priority number one by the Government?
In response to a question without notice I asked of the Minister for Education and Training on 29 October last year we achieved a small breakthrough: the department was to undertake another review and report back at the end of term one 2004. The review is examining three key questions: whether there will be sufficient school-aged children to support a new school; whether enrolments will be sustained to ensure the ongoing viability of the school; and what impact any new school will have on nearby schools. Mr Doug White from the Properties directorate is in charge of the review. He met with groups, such as the Lake Cathie Future School Committee led by Leslie Williams, on 17 December last year and the Hastings Council. Significantly, Hastings Council subsequently moved a unanimous motion in support of the actions of the Lake Cathie school committee to have the new school built at Lake Cathie.
Now that we have the support of the Government by way of a review, it seems that the main issues about building a school at Lake Cathie are timing and location. Everyone in the community wants these two points addressed as quickly as possible. As to the aspect of timing, there are compelling arguments, which I have stated before and will state again shortly, as to why a school at Lake Cathie should be built now. There is planning for growth in 14 regions around the Lake Cathie-Bonny Hills area. Realistically, it is planned that people will move into the area over the next 5 to 10 to 15 years. I suggest that with the significant coastal growth we are seeing in the area, there will be need for another school by the time area 14 is completed.
As to the location aspect, I have always accepted that Lake Cathie or Bonny Hills is the preferred site. However, having spoken with Hastings Council, its unanimous motion in support of a school at Lake Cathie is a significant point and one that I hope the Government recognises. Throughout the review process the Government has said that it will consult very closely with Hastings Council. I support that approach taken by the Government. However, with the council's motion having been passed unanimously, and with the council seemingly locked into the 3.18 hectare property on the corner of Ocean Drive and Fiona Crescent at Lake Cathie, I hope that the Government takes the council's lead and commits to the project on that site.
I am aware of concerns about that site, which are similar to the initial concerns about `the Camden Haven High School. Environmental concerns about the initial site—that is, I believe, the prevalence of squirrel gliders—next to North Haven Public School resulted in the school being built at another location. Importantly, therefore, I request that the Government undertake a review of the process so that in areas of coastal sensitivity and regions of high growth, such as Lake Cathie, environmental impact statements and planning processes are undertaken on the sites before the Government locks into a particular location. I think it is important to conduct an EIS regarding the site at Ocean Drive and Fiona Crescent, for example. We should learn our lesson from sagas such as that involving the Camden Haven High School site. Proper planning can be done and decisions can be taken when all the relevant information is provided.
The Lake Cathie Future School Committee, Hastings Council, the local member of Parliament, the Camden Haven Teachers Association, the New South Wales Teachers Association, Lake Cathie Progress Association and, I understand, the New South Wales Liberal Party and The Nationals—publicly through their former education spokesperson, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, and through the current shadow Minister for Education and Training—have offered strong support for the immediate construction of a new school at the Lake Cathie site. I congratulate them and thank them for their support. The missing link at present is the New South Wales Labor Government, which I strongly urge to deliver for the Lake Cathie community by building the much-needed school immediately. 6706 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
The arguments for building a new school at Lake Cathie are compelling. I will offer 12 arguments to the House. The first concerns the area's recognised growth potential, as calculated by Hastings Council in its planning and as endorsed by PlanningNSW. In the next 10 years growth in the local area is likely to increase five-fold to 10,000 people. A community of that size should certainly have a school. Second, 250 primary school students currently catch a bus every day to another school. That is reason enough for building a school locally. Third, the Department of Education and Training owns a suitable school site on the corner of Ocean Drive and Fiona Crescent. Fourth, the site is centrally located for the established population. At least 90 per cent of the current primary school age population could ride or walk to a school established on that site. Fifth, the centrality of the location would see the school located in the hub of the community, encouraging community involvement across the board.
Six, the site is close to shops, community halls, tennis courts and so on. Seven, footpaths have already been established leading from housing estates to the proposed school site. Eight, the property is already owned by the department and meets many of the requirements for new school site selection, including size, shape and slope, and is fully serviced. Nine, the site allows close interaction with the natural environment, including beaches, koala corridors, the lake and so on. Ten, it is in close proximity to other educational facilities, including playgroups and preschools, allowing a smooth transition for young people to primary school. Eleven, this view is strongly supported by the Camden Haven Teachers Association and the New South Wales Teachers Federation. Twelve, as I said before, the proposal is strongly supported by council and all amenities are on line. For example, in July 2002 the late Mayor of Hastings, Wayne Richards, wrote to the Minister for Education and Training supporting the provision of a primary school in the area in the short term. He also confirmed in that letter that sewerage services would be available for a primary school located at that site.
Those are 12 compelling reasons why a school should be built immediately at Lake Cathie. Most importantly, if the Minister decided at the conclusion of the review—or even now—to build a new school at Lake Cathie that facility could be established quickly. As the department owns the land and services are already in place there is no reason why building work could not commence immediately. Everyone acknowledges the need to plan future proposed developments carefully—I am sure the Government will make that point—but such processes should not overshadow or take precedence over the needs of those who already live in the Lake Cathie community. Two plus two equals four, and I hope that the Government will apply similar logic in this case. It does not need to review a simple, logical equation. I hope that the Government will acknowledge the compelling facts in support of building a new school for the Lake Cathie community and offering good local education opportunities.
Mr BRYCE GAUDRY (Newcastle—Parliamentary Secretary) [12.44 p.m.]: I move:
That the motion be amended by leaving out all words after "That" with a view to inserting instead:
"this House notes:
(1) that a review to consider the need for a school at Lake Cathie has been announced by the Minister for Education and Training; and
(2) this review will be completed in the coming months, and provide the analysis needed to determine the need for a new school in light of the major demographic changes occurring in the area.
I acknowledge the contribution by the honourable member for Port Macquarie in terms of his input in today's debate and his understanding of the demographic changes that are occurring in that part of the mid North Coast. Late last year I had the pleasure of opening the coastal conference in Port Macquarie at which the honourable member gave an erudite speech about population demographic movements on the coast generally, and in the Port Macquarie area in particular.
I recognise that area 14 at Lake Cathie will be subject to quite substantial population growth, as will the remaining Port Macquarie-Hastings council area. Therefore, it is appropriate that the Minister for Education and Training commission a comprehensive review to determine potential growth not only in the Lake Cathie area but in the Port Macquarie-Hastings-Camden Haven area before deciding on the location of this school and perhaps other schools. The honourable member for Port Macquarie referred to Camden Haven High School, its original site next to North Haven primary school and some of the environmental reasons for choosing a different site. That is a compelling argument in support of a review in this case to ensure that we make the appropriate choice.
The Government has already demonstrated a strong commitment to the area. In 1997 Tacking Point Public School to the north of Lake Cathie near Port Macquarie was opened. The school was constructed at a total cost of $4.546 million. In 2000 the new local high school for Lake Cathie students, Camden Haven High School, was opened. Students from years 7 to 12 attend the school and there is a distance education unit for off- 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6707 site students. I am sure that the honourable member for Port Macquarie will appreciate that a detailed process must be undertaken in order to determine whether a new school is needed. We must take into account whether there will be enough school-age children to support the new school, whether enrolments could be sustained to ensure its ongoing viability and whether any new schools would have an adverse impact on existing schools nearby. Such a review is extremely appropriate in light of the demography of the Port Macquarie area and the growth that is likely to occur in the surrounding corridors.
I am advised that Lake Cathie is a growing urban area. It is located 20 kilometres south of Port Macquarie and, according to the 2001 census, has a total population of about 2,100 people. Bonny Hills, which is located six kilometres to the south, had a total population of 2,200 at the time of the 2001 census. Residential development is expected to occur in area 14, which incorporates both Lake Cathie and Bonny Hills. There is no doubt that major demographic changes are occurring in the area, which is why we are conducting this review. We must understand more about the extent of the population growth that is likely to occur in the region before a commitment can be made to build a new school. The Minister has already informed the House that the Department of Education and Training will undertake a detailed review of projected enrolment and demographic trends in the Lake Cathie-Bonny Hills area. This review is currently taking place and consultation has occurred with North Haven Public School, Hastings Council, the Lake Cathie Progress Association and the Lake Cathie Future School Committee.
North Haven Public School has asked for time to consult with parents in the first weeks of term 1 and will submit comments by 8 March. Further consultation will be undertaken throughout the remainder of term 1. I can give a commitment to the honourable member for Port Macquarie and his constituents that they will be fully briefed about the review and its outcomes. I acknowledge that the honourable member plays an active role in his electorate, as demonstrated in his speech to the council conference. He is concerned about the provision of infrastructure for the growing population in his area. I reiterate that the Government has put in place the appropriate review to meet the education needs of Lake Cathie, and if a new school needs to be constructed it will be in the appropriate location, taking into account the changing demographics. I support the Government's amendment to the motion.
Mrs JILLIAN SKINNER (North Shore) [12.50 p.m.]: I support the honourable member for Port Macquarie in moving the motion. I understand that he has no objection to the amendment so I will not thwart that. I remind the Parliamentary Secretary that the Coalition made a pledge before the last election to build a new school at Lake Cathie. I am disappointed that a further review will be undertaken because the Government already owns the land, it is familiar with the demographics, and it knows current enrolment numbers and that 250 students have to travel by bus to and from school each day. I hope that the review is not just a delaying tactic by the Government to avoid a commitment of funding for a new school.
Mr Bryce Gaudry: It's about spending taxpayers' money sensibly.
Mrs JILLIAN SKINNER: Yes, it is about providing for children, who currently must travel long distances by bus to and from school. The need for a new school is immediate. I have had conversations and I have exchanged correspondence with Leslie Williams, chairperson of the Lake Cathie Future School Committee. The Leader of the Liberal Party and the Leader of The Nationals have visited the school and spoken to the community there. In October last year, when the Minister made the announcement of a review, the Opposition expressed concern that the community deserved more than just soothing words from the Government. The Government must commit to providing the necessary funding for the school. Review after review may be conducted; students and their families will continue to be disadvantaged until funding is allocated and construction commences. These 250 students travel daily from areas such as Lake Cathie to schools in North Haven and other parts of the Hasting district, and they will continue to do so until a school is built. I know this area reasonably well because some years ago my parents owned a house there.
It is a beautiful area and I am not in the least surprised at its population growth. North Haven Public School was built to cater for 275 students but last year enrolments were 476, and are predicted to increase. The Government must stop its stalling tactics and provide resources for a new school. I would never argue against the need for proper planning to take account of population growth and demographics. However, the Government is kidding itself if it thinks we do not know that the process has been ongoing. The Parliamentary Secretary, who is a sensible man, knows that also. It is not a matter that suddenly requires a review. The department does this work on an ongoing basis, as it should, to determine the future needs of students throughout New South Wales. The Government is aware, from previous reports on population in the Lake Cathie area, of the necessity for a school to be built and it knows the appropriate location. It is now time that the Government provided the necessary funding and constructed the school. 6708 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Mr ROBERT OAKESHOTT (Port Macquarie) [12.55 p.m.], in reply: I thank all honourable members who have contributed to the debate. I advise the House that I am happy to accept the Government's amendment. I acknowledge that a review is currently under way. However, this is an opportunity to highlight the review process and the high expectations of the mid North Coast community that genuine outcomes will emerge from the review. The community will be extremely disappointed and frustrated if, at the end of the review process, the response is negative. It is quite evident from attendance figures at playgroups, the numbers of people travelling on buses, PlanningNSW-approved growth figures, Hastings Council documents and consultation with people throughout the Lake Cathie community that the mid North Coast is experiencing a significant population growth. This places pressures on all services but, in the case of Lake Cathie and Bonny Hills, it has resulted in the need for improved school facilities and a new school at Lake Cathie.
I hope that when the review is completed in a couple of months it will be favourable. Expectations are high and arguments for provision of the school are strong. Indeed, the community looks forward with great interest to the outcome of the review process and to construction of a new school in the near future. I accept the arguments about location and that surrounding schools have been contacted and will be included in the review process. I hope that we can soon start planning in earnest for construction of the school, rather than have to reargue the case, or a third review being undertaken to determine population growth when anyone who lives in or visits the area would be well aware of its rapid growth.
Amendment agreed to.
Motion as amended agreed to.
[Madam Acting-Speaker (Ms Marie Andrews) left the chair at 1.00 p.m. The House resumed at 2.15 p.m.]
STATE EMERGENCY SERVICE VOLUNTEERS
Ministerial Statement
Mr JOHN WATKINS (Ryde—Minister for Police) [2.15 p.m.]: It will come as no surprise to honourable members that during the recent heavy rains experienced from Sydney to the Queensland border, the excellent volunteer workers of the State Emergency Service [SES] have again responded brilliantly to the many calls for help. Everyone should remember that it is these volunteers who join our emergency workers and head out to lend a hand when the rest of the community is attempting to escape dreadful weather conditions. The last few days have been no exception. The most serious flooding commenced on Tuesday and has affected the Tweed River at Murwillumbah, the Richmond- Wilson River around Lismore and Coraki, the Hastings River at Kindee Bridge and the Bellinger River at Thora. Some 12 SES units from the Richmond, Tweed, Clarence, Nambucca and Oxley divisions have responded to numerous calls for assistance, mostly in relation to waterlogged homes.
The majority of these tasks have been completed. Closer to Sydney, a further 41 units have responded to calls associated with heavy rain. Again, almost all of these tasks have been completed. Fortunately, I can report that the rains are now easing in the flood-affected catchments. Final flood warnings were issued this morning for the Hastings, Bellinger and Richmond-Wilson river systems. However, there is still a threat of damaging surf conditions, especially between Newcastle and Laurieton. State Emergency Service units along the coast will continue to monitor the affected areas for signs of erosion. I call on all members of his House to join with me in congratulating the volunteers of the SES, who never fail to offer courageous assistance to our police, fire and ambulance crews, and reach out to fellow members of the community.
Mr ANDREW HUMPHERSON (Davidson) [2.19 p.m.]: On behalf of the Opposition I voice our strong support for the SES and our appreciation of its recent work up and down the North Coast of our State. When times are difficult the SES, together with our other volunteer emergency services, come to the fore. Recent difficult circumstances will require ongoing monitoring. We very much appreciate the work they do. The quality of life of the wider community would not be as good at it is without their work.
ELDERS REAL ESTATE FORSTER-TUNCURRY TRUST ACCOUNT IRREGULARITIES
Ministerial Statement
Ms REBA MEAGHER (Cabramatta—Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Commerce) [2.20 p.m.]: As honourable members will recall, last week I announced that for the first time the Commissioner for Fair Trading had appointed a manager to a real estate agency amid concerns about trust account irregularities. The appointment was a first under our tough Property, Stock and Business Agents Act, 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6709 which came into effect last September. Earlier this week another manager was appointed to a real estate agency, this time on the State's mid-north coast. On Tuesday the Commissioner for Fair Trading appointed a manager to Pitaree Pty Ltd, trading as Elders Real Estate Forster-Tuncurry, because of alleged continued failures of the licensee to account for trust money on behalf of the agency's clients. An initial assessment indicates that the total shortfall is about $122,000. The manager has taken over all the duties of the licensee, including carrying on any work on behalf of existing clients of the agency. A thorough investigation is being carried out, and those who have suffered a loss will be able to make a claim to the New South Wales Government's Property Services Compensation Fund. This latest decision at Forster Tuncurry shows that we are serious about this issue and that we will take all necessary action to ensure that consumers are protected.
Ms KATRINA HODGKINSON (Burrinjuck) [2.22 p.m.]: The Opposition joins with the Government in commending the investigators for finding this group of real estate agents who have shortfalls in clients' accounts. I am concerned that this is the second case in two weeks. It begs the question: How many more are there in the New South Wales system? It would be prudent for the Office of Fair Trading to appoint additional investigators to ensure that all real estate agents operating throughout New South Wales get the message loud and clear that such shortfalls will not be tolerated in our society.
PORT KEMBLA PORT EXPANSION
Ministerial Statement
Mr DAVID CAMPBELL (Keira—Minister for Regional Development, Minister for the Illawarra, and Minister for Small Business) [2.23 p.m.]: Moves to expand the port of Port Kembla in line with the Government's ports growth plan are well under way. Tenders for the $14 million extension of the multipurpose wharf close on 9 March. The length of the wharf will be increased by 130 metres, and it will be able to birth two large ships at the same time. In the meantime the Illawarra Regional Development Board is overseeing an examination of the business opportunities that will flow from the expanded port. The related port industries growth group, as it is known, comprises representatives of a range of stakeholders.
We now have a major commercial development: yesterday the Port Kembla Port Corporation and Australian Amalgamated Terminals [AAT] announced that they have signed a memorandum of understanding [MOU]. Under the MOU, the Port Kembla Port Corporation and AAT will jointly establish and develop a multi- user general cargo facility in Port Kembla's inner harbour. Their joint statement said that the MOU "heralds an important step in commercialising the initiative made public in the New South Wales Ports Growth Strategy announcement by the Premier in late 2003". The general manager of AAT, Dean Wells, said:
Port Kembla is well positioned to move forward with the development of this facility and we are excited about the associated opportunities. Now that we have a high level agreement in place we will all be moving to get it operational as soon as possible.
Lloyds List welcomed the news of the MOU by saying that it puts commercial flesh onto the New South Wales ports master plan. Make no mistake, the Premier's announcement of last year has been swiftly backed up by action.
Ms PETA SEATON (Southern Highlands) [2.24 p.m.]: The Coalition supports and encourages all efforts to expand container terminal and port facilities at regional ports, including Newcastle and Port Kembla. I was pleased to be briefed on this matter. I was pleased also to meet with members of the chamber of commerce and to encourage efforts and work supportively with them, as well as the industry groups in the Illawarra. We must all commend Councillor Alex Darling, the Lord Mayor of Wollongong, for his leadership on this issue. Together with the Leader of the Opposition, I had the pleasure of meeting with Alex Darling and others in Wollongong late last year to be briefed on the matter and to commit our further support to it.
I welcome the news that Australian Amalgamated Terminals has signed the memorandum of understanding with the Port Kembla Port Corporation Authority. In addition to expanding the port facilities at Port Kembla, I simply ask the Government to ensure that the necessary transport infrastructure, including road and rail, is in place. I also ask the Government to determine when it will move forward on the Waterfall to Thirroul tunnel project, the cost of which has blown out from $360 million to $1.4 billion and has a big question mark hanging over it. We welcome all efforts to enlarge the port facilities and to encourage more jobs in the Illawarra and Port Kembla. 6710 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
PETITIONS
Parkes High School Airconditioning
Petition requesting the provision of airconditioners at Parkes High School, received from Mr Tony McGrane.
Stamp Duty Reduction Legislation
Petitions supporting the Duties Amendment (Stamp Duty Reduction) Bill 2003, received from Mr Greg Aplin, Mrs Judy Hopwood and Mr Michael Richardson.
Gaming Machine Tax
Petitions opposing the decision to increase poker machine tax, received from Mr Greg Aplin, Mrs Judy Hopwood, Mr Wayne Merton, Mr Michael Richardson, and Mr John Turner.
White City Site Rezoning Proposal
Petition praying that any rezoning of the White City site be opposed, received from Ms Clover Moore.
Water Police Pyrmont Site
Petition opposing development of the current Water Police Pyrmont site, received from Ms Clover Moore.
Kosciuszko National Park Management Plan
Petitions opposing the formulation of the Kosciuszko National Park Management Plan without community consultation, received from Mr Ian Armstrong, Mr Steve Cansdell, Ms Katrina Hodgkinson, Mr Donald Page, Mr Adrian Piccoli, Mr John Turner and Mr Russell Turner.
Freedom of Religion
Petition praying that the House reject the Anti-Discrimination (Removal of Exemptions) Bill, and retain the existing exemptions applying to religious bodies in the Anti-Discrimination Act, received from Mr Paul Gibson.
Road Traffic Arrangements
Petitions requesting a right turn bay on Windsor Road at Acres Road, received from Mr Wayne Merton and Mr Michael Richardson.
Mental Health Services
Petition requesting urgent increased funding for mental health services, received from Ms Clover Moore.
Belmont Community Midwifery Program
Petition requesting the implementation of a community midwifery program at Belmont, received from Mr Milton Orkopoulos.
CountryLink Rail Services
Petitions opposing the abolition of CountryLink rail services and their replacement with buses in rural and regional New South Wales, received from Mr Greg Aplin and Mr John Turner.
Newcastle Rail Services
Petition requesting the retention of Newcastle rail services, received from Mr Bryce Gaudry. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6711
Casino to Murwillumbah Branch Rail Line
Petitions requesting the extension of the Casino to Murwillumbah branch line to south-east Queensland, received from Mr Thomas George and Mr Donald Page.
Public Transport
Petition requesting the development of a transport blueprint for public transport as an alternative to private vehicle use, received from Ms Clover Moore.
Bus Service 311
Petition praying that the Government urgently improve bus service 311 to make it more frequent and more reliable, received from Ms Clover Moore.
Isolated Patients Travel and Accommodation Assistance Scheme
Petition objecting to the criteria for country cancer patients to qualify for the Isolated Patients Travel and Accommodation Assistance Scheme, received from Mr Andrew Stoner.
Companion Animals Legislation
Petition requesting amendments to the Companion Animals Act 1998, received from Ms Clover Moore.
Circus Animals
Petition praying that the House end the unnecessary suffering of wild animals and their use in circuses, received from Ms Clover Moore.
Sow Stall Ban
Petition requesting the total ban of sow stalls, received from Ms Clover Moore.
Cat and Dog Meat Sales
Petition requesting legislation banning the sale of cat and dog meat for human or animal consumption, received from Ms Clover Moore.
Alcohol Wet Centres
Petition requesting the establishment of wet centres in the inner city to provide a safe place for chronic drinkers, received from Ms Clover Moore.
COMMITTEE ON CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE
Report
Mrs Barbara Perry, as Chairman, tabled report 1/53, entitled "Review of the 2002-03 Annual Report of the NSW Commission for Children and Young People", dated February 2004.
Ordered to be printed.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
______
SYDNEY WATER CAPITAL EXPENDITURE
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: My question without notice is for the Minister for Energy and Utilities. In view of recent criticism by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal of the low level of renewals expenditure being undertaken by Sydney Water, can the Minister guarantee there will be no reduction in Sydney Water's capital expenditure over the next 10 years? 6712 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Mr FRANK SARTOR: The existing price path for Sydney Water expires on 30 June 2005. Sydney Water is in the process of making a submission to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal to address issues including capital expenditure and other issues relating to demand management and other expenditures. In that context the forward program will be considered.
Mr JOHN BROGDEN: I ask a supplementary question. In view of the Minister's answer, how does he justify an internal document from the general manager of Sydney Water that says in part, "To get on top of our present financial situation we need to wipe $1.7 billion from our total expenditure generated through reductions in our capital expenditure"?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Epping to order.
Mr John Brogden: Just be frank.
Mr FRANK SARTOR: The Leader of the Opposition would not want me to be too frank. The Coalition set up an independent process to assess price recovery for all sorts of matters including capital works. There is usually a dialogue between the State-owned corporations and the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal [IPART] and there is a dialogue with the shareholding Minister. These matters will be addressed. It is normal for these sorts of discussions to happen. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to aggregate two decades of spending he can do so.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of the Opposition to order.
Mr FRANK SARTOR: The simple fact is that at the moment Sydney Water is spending a record amount on capital works. Major projects have been undertaken over the last five years and there has been a great deal of success.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting.
Mr FRANK SARTOR: The next five-year price path will be considered and the Government will take responsibility for the outcome.
NATIONAL COMPETITION POLICY
Mr GEOFF CORRIGAN: My question is directed to the Premier. What is the Government's response to community concerns about Coalition stands on national competition policy, which would cost New South Wales families $51 million a year?
Mr BOB CARR: Our old friend the honourable member for Upper Hunter has been desperate to get back into the limelight. It is interesting that what draws him into the limelight as a Minister or shadow Minister is that magic figure of $50 million. It has motivated him right through his political career. Whenever George gets into trouble that magic figure of $50 million is in there somewhere. The House will recall—I might have mentioned it, I am not sure—that when he was the Minister for Lands and in charge of Luna Park he concocted, without the approval of the then Treasurer, an idea for spending $50 million of taxpayers money on building a roller coaster.
Mr George Souris: You are a liar.
Mr BOB CARR: You would never accuse Peter Collins of being a liar but he said that you sneaked that through.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Upper Hunter will come to order.
Mr BOB CARR: Peter Collins said, "It was used to fund the construction of the roller coaster in lieu of loan finance without further consultation with me."
Mr John Brogden: Point of order―
[Interruption.]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! What is your point of order? 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6713
Mr John Brogden: Relevance. The Premier was asked a question—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat.
Mr BOB CARR: The Auditor-General said at the time—
Mr John Brogden: Point of order―
[Interruption.]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat.
Mr BOB CARR: —that $50 million was thrown away on Luna Park. Here we have again a $50 million loss to the people and the schools and hospitals of New South Wales.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Coffs Harbour to order.
[Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Coffs Harbour to order for the second time.
[Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Coffs Harbour to order for the third time.
Mr BOB CARR: Let me spell out what that loss would cost the people of this State: 700 nurses or 560 police officers or 700 school teachers or 90 intensive care beds or 500 new ambulances or eight new primary schools. That is what would be lost.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Barwon to order.
Mr BOB CARR: Forcing New South Wales taxpayers to shoulder a $51 million cut in Commonwealth payments is simply the latest in a long line of grossly irresponsible financial commitments from this Opposition.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Murrumbidgee to order.
Mr BOB CARR: I am today releasing a list of them. They total billions of dollars in unfunded commitments to tax cuts or to extra expenditure and would blow any semblance of a responsible budget
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat.
Mr BOB CARR: The Government's proposed changes to liquor laws are, according to legal advice just becoming available, as restrictive as, or in fact more restrictive than, the needs test that currently resides in the legislation.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will come to order.
Mr BOB CARR: We drafted the changes to prevent the opening of new liquor outlets, and the legal advice confirms that our legislation would have that effect. I want to spell that out.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will come to order.
Mr BOB CARR: Indeed, a legal opinion from Bruce Bulfour, a liquor licensing legal expert, said last week—
Mr Andrew Tink: Point of order: The Police Association advice is—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Epping to order for the second time. I call the honourable member for Upper Hunter to order. 6714 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Mr BOB CARR: This is the legal advice: "If the current experience in respect of social impact statements under the Gaming Act is any guide the existing hoteliers and liquor store proprietors who do not want further competition may be comforted by these new developments in that there will be a more substantial barrier to new competition than the needs objections."
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. I call the honourable member for Upper Hunter to order for the second time.
Mr BOB CARR: What we have done in answer to the National Competition Council's demands is to draft a formula that this expert says is going to be more and not less restrictive than the needs test. Let me spell that out. The social impact test provides that before there can be another liquor outlet there must be the following conditions. First, there must be no negative effects on the local community—none. Second, the outlet cannot be near a school or a welfare provider. Third, it cannot affect public safety through vandalism, public disorder and drunkenness. There must be an examination of how many outlets are already in the area, whether another outlet will change the local character and whether the outlet will be in a low socioeconomic area.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting.
Mr BOB CARR: They are the grounds on which an application will be denied under our new formula. They could not be more comprehensive. The test could not be more rigorous.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Upper Hunter to order for the third time.
Mr BOB CARR: Poor old George is excited by any possibility of losing another $50 million, another nice round $50 million on top of what he did with Luna Park.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Leader of The Nationals to order.
Mr BOB CARR: The Leader of The Nationals can ask me a question next. Poor old George says that liquor will be sold from supermarkets. But the existing restrictions on supermarkets will not change under the law. There is no way under this legislation that a supermarket can look forward to selling alcohol alongside groceries under the formula we are proposing. In fact, none of the following will be able to sell takeaway liquor: supermarkets, restaurants, clubs, nightclubs, caterers, charter boats, theatres and cinemas, airports, florists and other retail stores. Further, the following types of persons will still be unable to apply for a liquor licence—
Mr Ian Armstrong: Point of order: Supermarkets are selling alcohol now. At Cowra, Young and Cootamundra alcohol is being sold out of supermarkets.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Lachlan to order. He will resume his seat.
Mr BOB CARR: The following types of persons will still be unable to apply for a liquor licence: minors, a person who is disqualified or who holds a suspended license, and a person who is not fit and proper— which I guess would exclude all members on the other side of the House! Of course the new legislation will also ban service stations completely from holding liquor licences. We did not want to touch the previous restrictions, but were forced to by the National Competition Council—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! For his buffoonery I call the honourable member for Wakehurst to order. A number of members have become somewhat excited during the Premier's answer to this question. A number of members are on one, two or three calls to order. All of those members are now deemed to be on three calls. The Premier has the call. His answer will be heard in silence, as will the answer of any other Minister or member.
Mr BOB CARR: What the Opposition ought to do if it were interested in the welfare of the people of this State is to talk to its colleagues in Canberra about competition policy madness. Faced with the prospect of $51 million in fines hurting every citizen of this State, we have crafted a formula that restricts outlets but which should meet the test applied by the National Competition Council, thereby protecting the interests of the people of New South Wales. We look forward to talking to the responsible and fair-minded crossbenchers in another place, who I am sure will act to prevent a $51 million body blow to the people who elected them.
RURAL HEALTH FUNDING
Mr NEVILLE NEWELL: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Health. What is the latest information on rural health funding?
Mr MORRIS IEMMA: In October 2002 the Government launched the rural health plan. That was a plan to improve the quality of health for people living in rural New South Wales. That plan and the commitment 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6715 behind that plan remain as strong as ever. Earlier this week the Government announced a boost to the plan to reduce long waiting lists across the State. In a very clear demonstration of backing that plan, we have the funds needed to deliver on our commitment made in October 2002.
The $20 million package released earlier this week includes nearly $8.5 million allocated exclusively to rural health areas for tackling long waits on elective surgery lists. The extra funding will enable hospitals to undertake some 1,500 additional operations such as knee replacements, hip replacements, cataract surgery and gall bladder operations. Across rural New South Wales this funding has been targeted at areas where high demand has led to patients waiting for longer than either they or we would prefer.
On the Northern Rivers, for example, over 680 additional operations will be undertaken, mainly cataract surgery and knee replacements. These operations will be funded by an allocation of $3.3 million to the Northern Rivers Area Health Service. On the mid North Coast nearly 300 people will receive their surgery sooner with the allocation of $1.9 million to that area health service. Greater Murray in the south will benefit from an allocation of more than $1.2 million, providing 138 more operations. The Mid Western Area Health Service will receive more than $1 million to provide 189 operations including 130 cataract operations, 19 hip replacements and 29 knee replacements.
The injection of these funds into rural New South Wales represents the first step in a process of continually attempting to reduce the time taken to perform operations and the time that people wait for those operations. These funds will not eliminate the long waiting lists. However, they will ensure that nearly 1,500 people who have been waiting for 12 months or longer will receive their surgery over the next 12 months. The announcement comes just weeks after the Government announced a $37.5 million package for capital works for hospitals right cross the State. From that package $14 million has been allocated to rural and regional hospitals for projects such as new intensive care equipment for Wagga Wagga Base Hospital, the relocation of the physiotherapy unit at Griffith Base Hospital, the upgrading of sterilising services at Dubbo Base Hospital and improving the service at 17 other hospitals in that region, the refurbishment of the Balranald health centre, and the refurbishment and expansion of other health services in far western New South Wales.
I am delighted to report that the additional funding for orthopaedic surgery—announced as part of the rural health plan of 2002-03—has produced some significant results. The initial allocation of $7.5 million in the last financial year, which in some cases included acquiring additional equipment or upgrading hospital facilities, resulted in an additional 690 procedures, mainly hip and knee replacements. The ongoing legacy of the rural health plan for orthopaedics is $5 million a year. It is expected that this funding alone will translate into about 350 operations.
Our commitment to rural health goes beyond just those commitments. We have also finished the trial of the mobile surgical unit and we are now working on plans for an expansion of that service, a service which delivers surgical services to patients who might normally have to travel long distances from their local community to a hospital to have their procedures done. Planning for an expansion of the mobile surgical unit is currently being undertaken. We have also instigated the New South Wales Institute of Rural Clinical Services and Teaching, a body which will bring together health professionals to plan better ways of recruiting and retaining staff, which is critical to the long-term sustainability of rural health services. We will continue to support all of those initiatives, in addition to supporting the multipurpose service initiative which has seen significant benefits to rural communities as far as redeveloped rural health facilities and the co-location of services onto the one site.
SYDNEY WATER MANAGING DIRECTOR MR GREG ROBINSON
Mr BRAD HAZZARD: My question is directed to the Minister for Energy and Utilities. Why will the Minister not dismiss Sydney Water's Managing Director, Greg Robinson, given that he awarded Sydney Water architectural contracts, worth tens of thousands of dollars, to a mate, and breached his director's conflict of interest obligations and the State Owned Corporations Act?
Mr FRANK SARTOR: Members may be aware that on the motion of the Government yesterday the upper House resolved to require and have tabled the report of the independent audit review commissioned by the board of Sydney Water, and that will be available to members of the upper House in the next day or so. The governance of Sydney Water is a matter for the board of Sydney Water. It is also the subject of an ICAC inquiry. The issues that have been raised are under consideration by the board of Sydney Water―and, as the shadow Minister should know, the Minister acts on the advice of the board of Sydney Water. 6716 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
SCHOOL ZONES FLASHING LIGHTS TRIAL
Ms LINDA BURNEY: My question is addressed to the Minister for Roads. What is the latest information about the trial of flashing lights in school zones?
Mr CARL SCULLY: Honourable members will be aware that the Government has been conducting a trial of three different styles of flashing lights at 11 chosen schools to gauge the different outcomes. The trial began in February last year and was conducted by ARRB Transport Research Ltd. I have now received the results of the trial. The immediate reaction of parents, members of Parliament and school principals is that it is a good idea to install flashing lights outside schools. In fact, many members on both sides of the House have called for flashing lights to be installed at all schools. I conducted the trial because it seemed the sensible thing to do, but I required further research. In other States limited research into the use of flashing lights has found a small reduction in vehicle speed that is not sustained over a long period. No trials supported the general rollout of flashing lights in school zones, but lights have been installed in places where sight distances are poor.
The results of the trial conducted over the past 12 months are mixed. In some cases the results are very encouraging and in other cases they are quite disappointing. I will give a couple of examples. At Mount Terry Public School near Albion Park the average vehicle speed prior to the installation of flashing lights was approximately 71 kilometres per hour. After three months, the average speed dropped to 51 kilometres per hour and, after 12 months, it dropped to 48 kilometres per hour. That is a very encouraging result. However, at Dundas Public School the average speed prior to the installation of flashing lights was 52 kilometres per hour. It increased to 59 kilometres per hour after three months and then fell to 47 kilometres per hour after 12 months. At Blaxland Public School—
Mr Donald Page: Is it working or not?
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Ballina to order.
Mr CARL SCULLY: The honourable member for Ballina should listen. The data for Blaxland Public School showed that before flashing lights were in place 68 per cent of drivers were speeding by more than 10 kilometres an hour. Three months after the installation of flashing lights that figure increased to 72 per cent— more drivers were speeding after the flashing lights went in. However, after 12 months the figure fell to 50 per cent. To ensure a fair comparison speeds were also measured at four schools without flashing lights. It is interesting to note that there was a reduction in vehicle speeds at those schools as well. It was not a great reduction but it was not entirely dissimilar to some of the slight reductions that occurred at schools with flashing lights.
There is a temptation for road safety experts to form the conclusion that the campaign for 40-kilometre speed zones around schools has had a positive impact and has caused a slight reduction in vehicle speeds around those schools. The national standard deems a trial of speed zones around schools to be successful if 85 per cent of drivers are driving at the designated speed. At not one school site were 85 per cent of drivers travelling at 40 kilometres per hour, regardless of whether flashing lights were installed. I believe more work must be done before a decision can be made in this case. It was discovered that features including the nature of the environment, the road type and the position of the speed zone and neighbouring speed zones are relevant.
Before making a determination to terminate or expand the program based on the experience of a limited number of schools and trial results that suggest only a very modest gain in speed reduction, I believe far more research and a much broader trial must occur. As a result, I have decided to install flashing lights at 30 further schools and compare them with 30 schools that do not have flashing lights. So 11 schools currently have flashing lights and flashing lights will be installed at another 30 schools. There is some evidence that the type of signage around schools without flashing lights may impact on speed reduction. Therefore, I propose to install at five schools signs warning of the approach of the school zone in order to assess whether that is an effective measure on its own. The data will be collected in March, August and again in April next year to see whether there are any seasonal changes.
I will indicate to the House some of the preliminary costs. Some commentators and members of Parliament have said, "Just do it; just spend the money. Install flashing lights at every access point at every school everywhere, and do it tomorrow." That simplistic suggestion would cost up to $150 million. I can tell any commentator or member of Parliament who wants me to allocate $150 million for what could be a very effective road safety initiative that I will not do that unless there is proper, scientific research to justify that action. I have 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6717 spoken to Sharryn Brownlee, the President of the parents and citizens association, and asked her to join a reference group that will oversight the research and the data that it produces.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Lane Cove to order.
Mr CARL SCULLY: I have written today to the Independent Schools Association, the Catholic Education Commission, the New South Wales Parents Council, and the Council of Catholic School Parents asking for representatives to serve on the reference group. I will be asking the police and representatives of the Motor Accidents Authority, the Department of Education and Training and Lgov NSW to participate also. I shall consult with the chairman of the Staysafe committee as I would like bipartisan input in this process. I think that is important.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for North Shore to order.
Mr CARL SCULLY: Opposition members have forgotten that there are Coalition members on the committee. I would like them to contribute to this project. Unfortunately, from time to time temptation gets the better of Opposition members and they try to score political points on road safety issues. In the spirit bipartisanship, I invite all members who represent country electorates—including the honourable member for Ballina and the Leader of The Nationals but, importantly, Country Labor members—to the Road Safety Summit, which will be held in the electorate of Port Macquarie on 27 and 28 May.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of The Nationals will cease interjecting.
Mr CARL SCULLY: I would like to hear contributions from members of Parliament who represent country seats. Bipartisanship on road safety is very important. We do not want politics to intrude on this issue.
COUNTRY TOWNS WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE PROGRAM
Mr ANDREW STONER: My question is directed to the Minister for Energy and Utilities. Why does the Minister continue to break the Government's election promise to spend an average of $85 million a year on the Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage Program, forcing councils such as Maclean and Wellington to keep operating defective sewerage schemes that have been condemned by the Environment Protection Authority? Is this yet another secret plan to cut capital expenditure?
Mr FRANK SARTOR: I thank the Leader of The Nationals for his question as it is gives me an opportunity to explain some of the things that we have been doing with country town water schemes. The Government made a commitment to spend $850 million, and that program is continuing. We have completed 202 projects so far, another 100 are under construction and close to another 200 projects are in preconstruction. Since Labor came to government more than 560 water and sewerage projects have received some form of assistance. This year we are spending $68 million on the scheme—which is more than $1 million a week. We will continue to work with local councils to address their issues. The Leader of the Opposition does not know that most local water utilities are owned by local councils. There are 126 utilities and they are run by the local councils.
We have been working assiduously with local water utilities, which are owned by local councils. However, many projects are taking a long time—even years—to come to fruition. At the request of the Local Government Association and the Shires Association I instigated a review into the scheme. They wrote to me and called for a review of the policy and processes for the provision of financial assistance for water and sewerage infrastructure projects under the Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage Program. I have instituted a task force to review the matter. I am interested in better targeting the total resources that the Government has committed and that will continue to be supplied. I am interested in setting priorities.
Mr Andrew Stoner: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The question was simply about sewerage schemes that did not comply with the Environment Protection Authority and the fact that the Minister has stopped considering applications under the Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage Program.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of The Nationals will resume his seat.
Mr FRANK SARTOR: What the Leader of The Nationals probably does not understand—because he often gets it wrong—is that the whole scheme is meant to be for backlog sewerage works. 6718 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Several members of the Opposition have now been warned about continually interrupting question time. I have extended a degree of latitude to the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of The Nationals. However, the Leader of The Nationals is not exempt from the standing orders. He should show leadership. If he does not and if he continues to behave in the way he is now behaving, he will be removed from the Chamber in the same way as any other member would be removed. I place the Leader of The Nationals on three calls to order.
Mr FRANK SARTOR: The Government is conducting the review because it is interested in better targeting the resources that have been allocated. Those resources will not be diminished. However, I want the projects that have some priority to be progressed from the planning stage to the construction stage more quickly than in the past. There will be some changes and a review is under way. The matter is being considered and the Government will deal with that in due course. Hopefully, the moratorium I have imposed over the last few months, except for drought and emergency works, will be lifted and we will be able to continue the program in a more targeted way to ensure that some of the outcomes are delivered more expeditiously. I make the point that some water utilities have substantial resources while others have very few. Indeed, 58 of the 126 utilities have annual budgets of less than $2.5 million. Many do not have a great deal of resources but some expect this program to fund expansion and other works. The program is simply for backlog works, for catching up where facilities and programs have not previously been in place.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Lachlan will come to order.
Mr FRANK SARTOR: In conjunction with this, I have also reviewed best practice guidelines. As honourable members would be aware, about a year ago the Parliament legislated to allow the taking of dividends from water utilities by local government. This had the support of both parties. There was a very complex system of guidelines that had to be adhered to before they could take dividends. I have asked for that process to be reviewed and simplified. I have road tested it with several councils and water utilities. The guidelines will also be reviewed in an effort to simplify them. They will be put on exhibition for public comment. Hopefully, those guidelines will be in place before councils prepare their management plans in May for the next financial year. It is important that best practice guidelines are pursued for water conservation and pricing policies in the country. It is important that all country and urban communities take responsibility for water conservation. I am pursuing that and doing it systematically at the request of the Local Government Association and the Shires Association.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Davidson to order. I call the honourable member for Clarence to order.
Mr FRANK SARTOR: The total sums committed for this program have not been diminished. However, I want the program to operate more efficiently and with more focus than in the past.
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS INDEPENDENCE
Mr BARRY COLLIER: My question without notice is directed to the Premier. What is the Premier's response to community concerns about comments last night at the Western Sydney Business Connection dinner by the Director of Public Prosecutions?
Mr BOB CARR: There is a great saying of Voltaire's: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." It was written for people like Nicholas Cowdery.
[Interruption]
The Leader of The Nationals interjects. He says he is better than George. He will not go to the next election without policies, as George did. I looked up his web site and it says, "Our policy is to give country and coastal communities a fair go" and underneath it says, "Policy page currently under construction". Enough of these distractions!
Mr Barry O'Farrell: Point of order: My point of order, Mr Speaker, is that if you want to maintain the standing orders you should not allow the Premier to go off on diversions when you have already put the Leader of The Nationals on three calls. Uphold the standing orders!
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I place the Deputy Leader of the Opposition on three calls to order. The Premier has the call. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6719
Mr BOB CARR: I support the independence of the DPP. I was a member of the Cabinet that approved the law in 1986. I voted for it in this House. I defend the office and its integrity, as does one of the most prominent members of the Liberal Party in New South Wales, someone held in esteem by all those who know the law and regard highly his legal opinions, that is, the honourable member for Gosford. He is listened to when he speaks out on these things and although I do not know what he is shadow for now, when he was shadow Attorney General he said:
We need an independent system and the State Opposition … supports the independence of the DPP.
He said that on radio 2SM. He then went on to say in a media release—
The DPP must remain independent from Government so that politicians are not running the judicial process and looking after their mates.
The honourable member for Gosford spoke clearly and forcefully, and we cannot dissent from what he said. When Mr Cowdery speaks out he would expect that we would respond. When he criticises the Government he would expect the Government to respond. Do not look at me like that. There are going to be plenty of police on the streets on Saturday night. By the way, they are talking in the Australian Financial Review about stitching up the preselection for Wentworth, which sends waves of euphoria over the Opposition side of the House. I think my colleagues will work to a moratorium when they hear that sort of talk.
If Mr Cowdery wants to speak out on these issues, he must expect that the Government will respond. One thing he got emphatically wrong in his speech last night is that the idea of tightening up the laws to combat crime is some sort of knee-jerk response. That is just plain wrong. When we passed new laws to break gangs and move them on, when we gave police the power to shut down drug houses—which they have used to great effect in Cabramatta and elsewhere—when we gave police the power to search for and confiscate knives, when we introduced standard minimum sentences, which the people endorsed at the last State election, when we passed laws to remove the presumption of bail for serious repeat offenders, they were all laws designed to make the community safer. We make no apologies to the DPP for that sort of legislation—laws to back up police in the tough job that they do by ensuring that police have the power to put criminals behind bars. I am not happy, but it is a fact of life that these laws have seen the prison population rise from 6,300 in 1995 to around 8,500 today. We have made no apology for it, asserting that we are all safer if the violent people are in gaol.
Mr Ian Armstrong: Point of order: The clock has been stopped while the Premier has been speaking. I ask that the clock—
Mr BOB CARR: It is that sort of performance.
Mr Ian Armstrong: You have stopped the State and you have stopped the clock.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I thank the honourable member for Lachlan for his observation. The Clerk will attend to the clock. The Premier has the call.
Mr BOB CARR: I speak; time stops. There is only one anxiety on my mind at this time and that is whether we can get through Saturday night in Wentworth without violence. I caution the Liberal Party to see that no-one destroys the ballot box or its contents in all the excitement that we will no doubt have witnessed in this great event. No more talk about stitching up ballots. We find it repugnant to talk in that terminology about preselection ballots. I just want to conclude—
Mr Andrew Tink: Point of order: It was in the Latham preselection that the ballot boxes were stolen. The ballot boxes were stolen in a Labor preselection involving Latham.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Epping will resume his seat. I place the honourable member on three calls to order. He has treated the House in a grossly disorderly way. I ask the Deputy Serjeant-at-Arms to remove him.
[The honourable member for Epping left the Chamber, accompanied by the Deputy Serjeant-at-Arms.]
Mr Andrew Fraser: Point of order: I draw your attention to Standing Order 57, which states that when the Speaker rises members shall sit down and be silent. On several occasions, not less than three minutes ago, you stood and called the Premier to order. He ignored your ruling. Yet you expel the honourable member for Epping for disorderly conduct when you were on your feet. 6720 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Coffs Harbour will resume his seat.
Mr BOB CARR: We have an opinionated, outspoken Director of Public Prosecutions in New South Wales, who makes occasional forays into the public debate, which he is entitled to do. But he cannot complain if we respond by criticising the position he has struck. Surely, nothing offers greater proof of the independence his office rightly enjoys and must continue to have.
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
Ms CLOVER MOORE: My question is to the Premier. Recently the Tasmanian Government committed $45 million to affordable housing in recognition of the impact of increased prices on housing affordability. Given that the impact is greater in New South Wales, especially Sydney, what action will his Government take to ensure the provision of affordable housing?
Mr BOB CARR: The availability of housing is determined, above all, by the supply of housing. What we have been doing on medium density and new release is designed to deliver new housing, producing a downward pressure on the cost of that housing. There is no other way of addressing affordable housing, except by addressing supply and demand. I have spoken about the supply of housing, but let us look at demand for housing. Canberra has opted to run an adventurous immigration policy—high immigration. Some 40 per cent of the national migrant intake comes into the Sydney basin, which equates to 1,000 new arrivals every week. The result is upward pressure on the demand for housing.
Supply and demand is what produces difficulties in the affordability of housing. There is no other entry into that equation. The Government supplies housing, sometimes over opposition, through medium density and new release. Moreover, the Federal Government has a role because the tap it controls determines demand. Running high immigration levels produces upward pressure on demand, which is something I have argued repeatedly to Canberra but that the Government in Canberra refuses to understand.
Mr Michael Richardson: Point of order: I think the Premier—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I want to know what your point of order is, not what you think.
Mr Michael Richardson: My point of order is relevance. I think the Premier was confusing affordable housing with affordability of housing.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for The Hills will resume his seat.
[Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for The Hills will resume his seat.
POLICE VIDEO SURVEILLANCE
Mr ALAN ASHTON: What is the latest information on police powers and video surveillance footage?
[Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for The Hills will resume his seat.
[Interruption]
Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the honourable member for The Hills does not resume his seat he will be removed from the Chamber.
Mr JOHN WATKINS: Honourable members should be aware that Strike Force Timepiece has been formed to investigate the incidents that occurred at Redfern 10 days ago. The police are doing a great job making numerous arrests in relation to the riot and putting people before the courts. Today I am pleased to advise the House that in the past 10 days seven people have been charged by the police and 31 charges have 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6721 been laid, including 7 for riot, 7 for affray, 7 for violent disorder, 4 for malicious damage, 4 for throw missile, 1 for malicious damage by fire and 1 for possess prohibited drug. The great work of this strike force will continue. I have also taken steps to ensure that video evidence examined by the investigators is not comprised by any court precedent. It is clearly in everyone's interest that New South Wales must have the ability to use relevant surveillance tape to prosecute offenders.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is too much audible conversation in the Chamber.
Mr JOHN WATKINS: Last week I met with Local Area Commander Mr Dennis Smith, who raised concerns about the admissibility of still pictures and video evidence when matters reach court. As honourable members should be aware, Strike Force Timepiece is using numerous hours of television and surveillance footage to identify those involved in the Redfern riot. As soon as Dennis Smith raised those concerns I had my office examine the precedent he cited. It was the 2001 High Court case of Mandara Smith. After an initial examination and some discussion with the Attorney General's Office I also referred the matter to Commissioner Moroney, who has since sought legal advice. The commissioner has now advised me that he has legal advice that this case cannot be used as authority to exclude images that depict an offence being committed.
That advice clearly states that it does not matter whether images come from security cameras, media outlets or bystanders. The bottom line is as long as the pictures depict an offence being committed they are relevant and admissible. I am pleased to advise the House that last night a memo was sent to all officers explaining how they should proceed in such cases. If any officers feel they have been hampered from obtaining convictions as a result of this case they have been asked to forward those details to the commissioner's office as a matter of urgency. Police will enforce the law—that means using all the evidence at their disposal. I am pleased that the use of surveillance tapes or other footage and pictures to put offenders before the courts can be used with confidence. Police will continue their great work in Redfern. I am sure that all members of this House support them in that duty.
Questions without notice concluded.
APPLICATION OF STANDING ORDERS
Privilege
Mr IAN ARMSTRONG (Lachlan) [3.27 p.m.]: As an elected member of this place I come into question time each sitting day confident that the standing orders as laid out will be applied equally to all and that I can operate within those standing orders. I put it to you, Mr Speaker, that today, because of the inequality of the application of the standing orders, particularly when it came to the Premier's performance, my privileges as a member have been subjugated. I ask that there be an understanding for me, as a member, that equality will be applied to all members, including the Premier, who is no more or no less elected than any other one of us here today.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Lachlan has been a member of this House long enough to know that under no circumstances should he reflect on the Chair in that way. I assure the honourable member for Lachlan that the Chair gave all members a considerable degree of latitude in question time, during which the conduct of a number of members was nothing less than disgraceful. I was on the verge of directing that a number of members, in addition to the honourable member for Epping, be removed from the Chamber. Indeed, the honourable member for Lachlan was on three calls to order following several interjections. In order to obviate their removal from the Chamber because of interjection and unruly behaviour, I warned several members a number of times that they were on three calls to order.
Although this is a robust Chamber it will be conducted in accordance with the standing orders. I am always willing to listen to advice, particularly from members with substantial experience in the Chamber. The Chair exercises a considerable degree of tolerance, but if members insist on contravening the standing orders, they must suffer the consequences. I repeat that during question time today the Chair persevered with extending a degree of latitude to a number of members on both sides of the House, particularly those who were on three calls to order and whose behaviour warranted their removal from the House. 6722 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
CONSIDERATION OF URGENT MOTIONS
Central Coast General Practitioners Shortage
Ms MARIE ANDREWS (Peats) [3.29 p.m.]: This motion is urgent because the Central Coast community is facing a chronic lack of general practitioners [GPs]. It is urgent because the number of GPs has fallen by 18 per cent over the past decade while at the same time the region's population has grown by 19 per cent. The motion is urgent because the shortage of GPs means that many residents are turning to emergency departments at local hospitals, placing further strain on our hospitals. This motion is urgent because many health needs are not being met and in some cases residents are ending up in hospital unnecessarily.
Sydney Water Managing Director Mr Greg Robinson
Mr BRAD HAZZARD (Wakehurst) [3.30 p.m.]: My motion is urgent because Sydney Water is a mighty utility that supplies water to Sydney, the Illawarra and the Blue Mountains Therefore, it deserves a Minister, a chairman of the board and a managing director who are complying with their obligations under the State Owned Corporations Act and delivering good outcomes for Sydneysiders. My motion is urgent because Sydney Water's management and consultants should not be a protected haven for the worst of the Labor Party's mates culture. It is urgent because, on one hand, the current managing director is putting a cleaner through knowledgeable and capable staff, and, on the other hand, he is bringing on board consultants by the bucket load, many of whom, it appears, are being appointed on the "mates only need apply" criteria.
My motion is urgent because it all comes down to the Minister for Energy and Utilities, who is one of the newest Labor mates. He worked with Greg Robinson at the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority when Robinson was the chief executive officer and the Minister was on the board. Effectively, it comes down to a protection racket afforded by the Minister to his mates. My motion is urgent because the selection process at Sydney Water was delayed after Alex Walker was made to carry the can for the board and the Carr Government's incompetence in wasting $61 million on the customer information billing system.
The Minister came here in March 2003 and by May his old mate was on the payroll. The new broom has seen consultancy after consultancy appointed at costs ranging from $20,000 to $100,000 each. So while loyal staff are being jettisoned, consultants are being parachuted into Sydney Water in greater numbers than paratroopers into Normandy on D-Day. My motion is urgent because the question is: How much of taxpayers money that should be used to upgrade the ageing infrastructure at Sydney Water is going into the pockets of the mates of Greg Robinson and the Minister? It is urgent because the Government must answer that question. After an estimates committee hearing in November Gabrielle Kibble quickly ordered an Internal Audit Bureau report into allegations, admitted by Greg Robinson, that he had recommended Misho architects to design a new foyer for Sydney Water.
Mr Alan Ashton: Point of order: I am loath to take this point of order because I like to give the honourable member for Wakehurst a little run. However, the honourable member has mentioned about eight or nine names. He is arguing the case against Sydney Water; he is not explaining why his motion is urgent. He used the word "urgent" before he proceeded to defame many New South Wales citizens. I ask that he be brought back to the reasons why his motion should have precedence over that of the honourable member for Peats.
Ms Clover Moore: To the point of order: The honourable member for Wakehurst is presenting information so that we can take an informed vote. Therefore, Mr Speaker, I ask you to invite Government members not to trivialise this important matter.
Mr BRAD HAZZARD: My motion is urgent because the allegation is that Mr Robinson, who heads Sydney Water, has failed his fiduciary duty to the board as a director, as set out in the director's manual. As managing director he failed to comply with Sydney Water's procurement guidelines laid down for all staff to follow. He failed his staff at Sydney Water by his omission in following the required guidelines. He failed the people of Sydney. My motion is urgent because the House needs to know what happened to the report, which has been the subject of every effort by Labor to keep it hidden.
First, Gabrielle Kibble, doubtless on the Minister's direct instructions, refused point blank to produce the Internal Audit Bureau report to a parliamentary committee. That makes it extremely urgent. She sought to hide behind her own actions in sending the report to ICAC; ICAC eventually advised that it was not for Sydney Water to make that refusal. The fact that the report had been sent to ICAC could not be used as an excuse not to 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6723 produce it. It was left to Sydney Water. My motion is urgent because that revelation means that the Government has an obligation to produce the report and ensure that everyone sees it, not only a few members in the upper House.
Then we had stage two of the protection racket. Effectively, the defence was that there were protected disclosures in the report and that the identities of the people should be kept secret. What rubbish! If the Government was concerned it would release the report. The community should know that it has already released the names of those people through answers to questions on notice. The Carr Government is covering up what is happening at Sydney Water. Many Sydney Water staff and people in the community want to know. What has been the Minister's attitude?
My motion is urgent because the Minister has shown nothing but an attitude of cover-up, cover up, cover-up. According to Mr Robinson, the Minister even had a cosy little discussion with Mr Robinson in which he agreed that it was all just about perception. That does not hang together. It is urgent that we examine this closely because at the same time Gabrielle Kibble was ordering an Internal Audit Bureau Report and ICAC was commencing an investigation the Minister had decided that it was all about perception. Why wait? Greg Robinson is a mate of the Minister. Another twist is that Greg Robinson told the parliamentary committee that Gabrielle Kibble and the Minister thought that the complaints made under protected disclosures were vexatious. Strangely, Gabrielle Kibble knew nothing about it. Was Mr Robinson lying, or was Gabriel Kibble lying? And the smell gets worse. The Parliament is entitled to know exactly what is going on at Sydney Water under the auspices of the Minister and the Premier. [Time expired.]
Question—That the motion for urgent consideration of the honourable member for Peats be proceeded with—put.
The House divided.
Ayes, 51
Ms Allan Ms Hay Mr Pearce Mr Amery Mr Hickey Mrs Perry Ms Andrews Mr Hunter Mr Price Ms Beamer Mr Iemma Dr Refshauge Mr Black Ms Judge Mr Sartor Mr Brown Ms Keneally Mr Scully Ms Burney Mr Knowles Mr Shearan Miss Burton Mr Lynch Mr Stewart Mr Campbell Mr McBride Mr Tripodi Mr Collier Mr McLeay Mr Watkins Mr Corrigan Ms Meagher Mr West Mr Crittenden Ms Megarrity Mr Whan Ms D'Amore Mr Mills Mr Yeadon Mr Debus Mr Morris Ms Gadiel Mr Newell Mr Gaudry Ms Nori Tellers, Mr Gibson Mr Orkopoulos Mr Ashton Mr Greene Mrs Paluzzano Mr Martin
Noes, 34
Mr Aplin Ms Hodgkinson Mr Roberts Mr Armstrong Mrs Hopwood Mrs Skinner Mr Barr Mr Humpherson Mr Slack-Smith Ms Berejiklian Mr Kerr Mr Souris Mr Cansdell Mr McGrane Mr Stoner Mr Constance Mr Merton Mr Torbay Mr Debnam Ms Moore Mr J. H. Turner Mr Draper Mr O'Farrell Mr R.W. Turner Mr Fraser Mr Page Mrs Hancock Mr Piccoli Tellers Mr Hartcher Mr Pringle Mr George Mr Hazzard Mr Richardson Mr Maguire 6724 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Pairs
Mr Bartlett Mr Brogden Ms Saliba Ms Seaton
Question resolved in the affirmative.
CENTRAL COAST GENERAL PRACTITIONERS SHORTAGE
Ms MARIE ANDREWS (Peats) [3.44 p.m.]: I move:
That this House expresses its concern at the lack of general practitioners on the Central Coast and the subsequent impact on the community.
There is no doubt that general practitioners [GPs] provide a valuable community service. It is, therefore, critical that the community has good access to GPs at all times. It is a service for which we should not have to fight. However, on the Central Coast it has become increasingly difficult to see a local GP, and in many cases residents have simply given up trying to see a doctor after being turned away from several practices. Many practices have closed their books and are no longer taking new patients. Some residents are being forced to travel from Wyong shire to Gosford city and even to Woy Woy in the hope that they may increase their chances of seeing a GP, while others are forced to wait several weeks before they can get in to see a doctor. The situation can be extremely frustrating and upsetting for residents who are simply trying to visit a local doctor. The shortages are not acceptable, and the community of the Central Coast deserves much better.
I urge the Federal Government to take immediate steps to have the number of doctors increased. The shortage places further strain on general practitioners. Many are overworked after committing to large amounts of overtime to help to meet the demand. It is hard for doctors to turn away patients who are in need. The Federal Government is placing unnecessary strain on local doctors—doctors who should not be put into that position. The doctors are also struggling to attract new GPs to their practices. They find it difficult to recruit locums when they need time off. This places tremendous pressure on the general practitioners and makes the job extremely tough. The shortage is due in part to a significant decrease in the number of GPs on the Central Coast. In the past 10 years the region has experienced an 18 per cent reduction in the number of GPs. Ten years ago the Central Coast had 300 GPs, but now it has just 227. It is estimated that the region needs at least another 60 full- time GPs to cope with the current population. Whereas there has been a decrease in the number of GPs, the shortage has been exacerbated by a 19 per cent increase in the population of the area over the past 10 years.
The Central Coast is still one of the fastest-growing regions in New South Wales, with some particular areas in the north of the region experiencing tremendous growth. These residents deserve good access to a local GP. They deserve a high standard of health care, and that is just not happening at the moment. The State Government has recognised the infrastructure needs of the region as a result of population growth and has injected $190 million to upgrade the Gosford and Wyong hospitals. The investment will make a significant difference to the patients at those hospitals and to the doctors and nurses who are working for Central Coast Health. However, the Federal Government has not responded to the GP shortage, leaving the region to struggle with a lack of resources. To give a clear picture of the situation, there is one doctor for 1,928 people in the Wyong local government area while in the Gosford area there is one doctor for 1,140 people. Health Insurance Commission data indicate that dozens of additional GPs are required to service the Central Coast.
It is a matter of great concern that the average age of Central Coast GPs is 53 years, with 30 per cent of doctors due to retire within the next five years. Only approximately 8 per cent of our GP work force is under 40 years of age. Under the current circumstances the number of GPs on the Central Coast will be further reduced. This trend must be stopped. Improvements need to be made urgently to ensure that more doctors are attracted to general practices on the Central Coast. The current policies will not even replace our retiring doctors, let alone cope with population growth. It is clear that the problem will only get worse unless new measures are adopted urgently. That is why the Federal Government should intervene and invest time and resources in resolving the issue. It should increase the Medicare rebate to make the option of becoming a GP more attractive. It should also restore bulk-billing levels. In the Federal electorate of Dobell, for example, bulk-billing fell from 86 per cent in 2001 to just 57 per cent in the September 2003 quarter—a massive reduction.
Another factor influencing the shortage is the policy that has restricted the number of doctors allowed to enter the general practitioner training scheme. The policy has been in place since 1996, or when the Howard Government came into office. We also lose out because doctors who are prepared to leave the major centres are 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6725 directed to rural positions and not regional areas such as the Central Coast. This has a big impact on the age of the coast's GP work force and it means that there are few young doctors working on the coast. The make-up of the coast's population also exacerbates the shortage. The region has a disproportionately large elderly population, many requiring intensive health care and weekly visits. Also, large numbers of children, with their special health needs, live on the Central Coast. The demographics of the Central Coast indicate that the shortage of doctors needs to be addressed urgently. I turn to the amount of money the Federal Government spends on Central Coast GP consultations each year, $124 per person. This compares with $197 per person in eastern Sydney and $164 per person in western Sydney. The region is clearly not receiving its fair share of funds.
Mr CHRIS HARTCHER (Gosford) [3.51 p.m.]: I move:
That the motion be amended by the addition of the following words "and condemns the Carr Labor Government and the members for Peats, Wyong and The Entrance for their failure to make financial assistance available to the Central Coast Area Health Service to overcome this problem".
The honourable member for Peats has identified a problem on the Central Coast, the shortage of medical practitioners. The figures that she gave were given to the House on 24 October 2002 by the honourable member for The Entrance, who is now the Minister for Gaming and Racing, when he made a private member's statement. Eighteen months have elapsed since that speech by the honourable member for The Entrance. The New South Wales Labor Government and the three Labor members representing parts of the Central Coast have done nothing to address the problem that the honourable member for The Entrance identified in 2002. In the meantime, in November 2003 the State Government made a major financial allocation to hospitals across New South Wales to develop outpatient services to relieve the pressure on general practitioners. That financial allocation did not include the Central Coast, which received none of that money, despite the fact that it had three Labor members and despite the fact that the honourable member for The Entrance had one year earlier identified exactly the same problem that the honourable member for Peats has just referred to. Labor members are self- indicted.
The Central Coast needs good medical services. More general practitioners are needed. Health is a responsibility shared by the State and Federal governments. The State Government has acknowledged the pressures imposed upon hospital outpatient services by the lack of general practitioners in south-western Sydney, western Sydney and the Hunter. It has not acknowledged that the same pressure applies on the Central Coast. One can only wonder at the effectiveness of the three Labor members and the attitude of the Minister for Health when they know about the problem so vividly highlighted by the honourable member for The Entrance in October 2002. I congratulate him on bringing the matter to the House. In 2004 nothing has been done, but the honourable member for Peats has just repeated information given by the honourable member for The Entrance in the context of supporting her candidate, Trish Moran, for the Federal seat of Robertson. What an interesting scenario that presents. The honourable member for Peats is to be congratulated—I gave notice of a motion in this regard—on the skill with which she ensured that Daniel Cook was defeated and her candidate won the preselection for Robertson.
Ms Marie Andrews: Point of order—
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! The honourable member for Peats rises, I believe on a predictable point of order. Perhaps I could short-circuit the point of order by indicating to the honourable member for Gosford that if he wishes to speak on the matter in his notice of motion he should do so when it is being debated. It does not come within the leave of this motion.
Mr CHRIS HARTCHER: Then you do not need to hear the point of order.
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! I invite the honourable member for Peats to state her point of order.
Ms Marie Andrews: I raise the point of relevance. The honourable member for Gosford is not addressing the urgent motion. He should be asked to speak to the matter before the House and not some other matter that is unrelated to the debate before the House.
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! I uphold the point of order and ask the honourable member for Gosford to restrict his comments to the motion before the Chamber.
Mr CHRIS HARTCHER: Mr Acting-Speaker, you more than anyone else would be interested in hearing what the right-wing members are doing to themselves on the Central Coast. 6726 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! The honourable member for Gosford may perhaps do that at another time, and in accordance with the standing orders.
Mr CHRIS HARTCHER: We will not go into that now but in a more private context I am sure. The Central Coast needs adequate medical services and a State government that is prepared to support them. Gosford Hospital and the Central Coast Area Health Service should be given the financial assistance necessary to engage medical practitioners for its outpatients department to relieve the existing strain. The failure of the State Government and the three local members to take action to alleviate the problem is an indictment of them. It has been reported that ambulances have had to wait an extraordinary period of up to four hours at Gosford Hospital to discharge their patients because of the enormous demand placed upon the emergency services at Gosford. Yet the Central Coast missed out in that allocation of money in 2002. Why?
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! The Minister for Gaming and Racing will restrain himself.
Mr CHRIS HARTCHER: Last week the Premier announced a $30 million allocation to increase the opportunities for elective surgery, once again, to reduce the demands on hospitals. How much of that money have the three Labor members made sure goes to the Central Coast? In addition to the two Labor backbenchers two Ministers are involved—the Minister for Gaming and Racing and the Minister for the Central Coast— although people would be surprised to know it because they have not taken any action. The Minister with the title Minister for the Central Coast is from a different right-wing faction from that of the honourable member for Peats, who moved this motion. That Minister is supposed to look after the Central Coast, to champion the Central Coast. He does zero for the Central Coast.
We never hear the Minister talk about the lack of medical practitioners on the Central Coast. We never hear the Minister talk about Gosford Hospital's need for additional funding to overcome the problem in its outpatients department. We never hear him talk about the ambulance crisis at Gosford. We never hear him address the myriad issues faced by the Central Coast. He has a title, a salary and a privilege but the position carries with it no work or responsibility. If ever a Minister should be indicted by this Parliament, it is the so- called Minister for the Central Coast. I look forward to the next issue of that excellent journal, Sydney Business Review, which I am sure will carry a sustained criticism of Mr Della Bosca for his inactivity on behalf of the Central Coast.
The Opposition believes that the Central Coast needs better medical services. We have raised the issue from time to time and have supported any sensible move by the State Government to increase health services to the Central Coast. I have commended both health Ministers, the Hon. Craig Knowles and the Hon. Morris Iemma, for their budgetary allocations for capital works for Gosford Hospital and the Central Coast Area Health Service. The Premier likes to quote a newspaper clipping of my remarks to the House in post-budget discussions. I make no apology for my remarks. We need capital works. We also need assistance for recurrent medical services, and we are not getting the assistance from the State Government that we so urgently require. Why did we miss out on the budgetary allocation in 2003 from the Government? Why did the three Labor members say nothing for the Central Coast? Why are they saying nothing about train services from the Central Coast? Why are they saying nothing about the loss of the education office on the Central Coast?
Mr Grant McBride: Point of order: The honourable member for Gosford has had a good run, but there is a question of relevance. I cannot understand how trains on the Central Coast have anything to do with bulk- billing, which has been a major issue on the Central Coast. The figures that were quoted are the latest figures: a drop from 80 per cent down to 50 per cent in a short period of time. What has the honourable member for Gosford done? Absolutely nothing! All he has done is talk about internal party politics and anything else to fill up his time because he has got nothing to say. He cannot even defend the actions of the elected Central Coast Federal Liberal members, who have done nothing! All they are worried about is bloody Tumbi Creek!
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! I suggest that the Minister for Gaming and Racing should deliver his speech at the appropriate time rather than when he is taking a point of order. I am sure the honourable member for Gosford was making only a passing reference to rail services. The honourable member for Gosford has the call.
Mr CHRIS HARTCHER: The Minister for Gaming and Racing is defending his inactive factional colleague, the Minister for the Central Coast. They were described in the upper House as the three wise monkeys, and they certainly are: hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil. As far as the Central Coast is concerned the three of them have nothing to say about the failure of the Government. They are worried only about their internal factions. [Time expired.] 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6727
Mr GRANT McBRIDE (The Entrance—Minister for Gaming and Racing) [4.01 p.m.]: We face a major issue on the Central Coast and I am disappointed that a senior member of the Opposition who has represented an electorate on the Central Coast since 1988 had trivialised the debate. He has trivialised the fact that elderly people on the Central Coast cannot see a general practitioner [GP]. There are now two fewer female GPs on the Central Coast than there were two years ago and patients cannot visit a female GP unless they have made prior arrangements. The honourable member for Gosford has trivialised the fact that there are no GPs on the Central Coast for children or elderly people and they are forced to go to public hospitals because those services are not available. The two Federal Liberal members from the area are the honourable member for Robertson and the honourable member for Dobell, and what have they done about this? Absolutely nothing. They have had meeting after meeting and delivered absolutely nothing.
While the Federal Government is doing nothing the people on the Central Coast are not sitting back waiting for something to happen; they are looking for alternative solutions. One of the key solutions to the chronic lack of general practitioners on the Central Coast is what is now known as an integrated primary care service centre. The Federal representatives are doing absolutely nothing and the honourable member for Gosford defends their inaction while there are people on the Central Coast who cannot see a GP! The honourable member might be able to see a GP but these people certainly cannot, and he could not care less. He sits there and laughs. He thinks it is a bloody big joke! It is a big joke for him, but it is not a big joke for people on the Central Coast. It is not a big joke for mothers who cannot get their children to see a GP. It is not a big joke for people who are looking after their elderly parents and relatives and they cannot see a GP. The honourable member stands there and laughs and makes a joke of it.
Mr Chris Hartcher: Point of order: The Minister is showing a commendable passion for health services—
Mr GRANT McBRIDE: You should show some passion for your area. You show absolutely no compassion. You sit there and laugh and make a joke about a serious issue on the Central Coast, and you have done nothing.
Mr Chris Hartcher: Control yourself! Self-control is very important. Why does the Minister not show the same passion for the thousands of commuters who are stranded on Gosford railway station—
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! There is no point of order.
[Interruption]
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! The honourable member for Gosford will resume his seat.
[Interruption]
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! I call the honourable member for Gosford to order.
Mr GRANT McBRIDE: As I said earlier, the primary care centre is to be established on the Central Coast. It involves Central Coast Health, the Central Coast Division of General Practice, the University of Newcastle and Wyong Council. The primary care centre will offer a new approach to integrated health care. It will be based at North Wyong, an area experiencing rapid population growth; in fact, it is one of the fastest- growing areas in the State. We have all agreed that the area lacks an adequate number of general practitioners and, as we have heard, efforts to date at the Federal level to improve the situation have been totally unsuccessful.
The honourable member for Gosford laughs and trivialises health care for both young and elderly people on the Central Coast. The team behind the new centre has five goals: to increase the number of GPs through the establishment of the centre; to improve patient outcomes through the integration of different primary health services; to establish long-term working relationships between the participants in this proposal; to provide training for health professionals and to conduct research and evaluation on the network itself and its effects on the health outcomes of the local communities; and, finally, to enable the transfer of successful integration models from the network to other sites on the Central Coast, as well as elsewhere in New South Wales and Australia. 6728 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
The primary care centre will provide medical, nursing and allied health services on site, at other points in the community and in the homes of local residents. It will complement other services on the Central Coast. It will be a new model for health care in New South Wales and it will rely on an integrated approach. The centre is set to attract doctors, eager to be involved in a model of health care. A community forum will be established to provide input into the development and ongoing management of the network. The proposal will be developed in two stages. Stage one will involve the employment of a general practitioner, project manager and support staff. During stage two staffing levels will be increased with additional doctors and nurses employed. A formal evaluation will be undertaken to determine the impact and success of the project.
This initiative by Central Coast Health has been taken for two reasons: firstly, we have one of the largest young populations in New South Wales and, secondly, we have one of the largest elderly populations in New South Wales. In fact, it is one third higher than the State average. It is also a response to the ever- decreasing level of GP care on the Central Coast. However, the initiative will take time to implement and it will require the support of the Commonwealth Government. In the meantime, I urge my local Federal Government representatives, the honourable member for Robertson and the honourable member for Dobell, to shake their Government into action and improve the numbers of GPs on the coast.
Mr PAUL CRITTENDEN (Wyong) [4.06 p.m.]: One of the most difficult things that any local member has to deal with is an inquiry by a new resident to the electorate who rings the member's office and asks, "Do you know of a general practitioner [GP] who will accept myself and my family as patients in this area?" That alarming incident has occurred not once but at least half a dozen times in my electorate office this year. If the honourable member for Gosford were honest he would probably admit that the same thing has happened to him. It is worrying when people move into the new release areas such as Hamlyn Terrace and Woongarrah or the more established parts of the Wyong electorate, and cannot find a GP who will put them on the books because, quite simply, the GPs who practise there are grossly overworked, and there are not enough of them. That is the fundamental problem.
The provision of GPs is a matter for the Federal Government; it comes under the Medicare agreement. As I have said the reality is that the Central Coast has a massive shortage of GPs. We all know that the honourable member for Gosford comes from that extreme right-wing Urbanchich section the right of the New South Wales Liberal Party, and we all know that he is a devotee of the Prime Minister, who wants to get back to the 1960s and have a white picket fence. When I was a kid in the 1960s, often my mother would take me to the chemist for medical treatment because there was a shortage of GPs then—in the great utopian world of the sixties. In the past 12 months I have not been able to see my GP, Dr John Vaughan at Lake Munmorah, unless I knew two weeks in advance that I was going to be sick. That is how long it takes to get an appointment to see him.
Twice in the past 12 months I have trotted down to Robert King, the pharmacist at Toukley pharmacy, to get medical advice for some minor ailment. As an adult I suppose I can deal with that issue, but parents with young children are not prepared to take that risk; they want to get medical treatment from a GP. There are no GPs available, so their only alternative is to go to Wyong Hospital. It has not always been like that. I supported the establishment of the private medical facility adjacent to Wyong Hospital on the basis that it would have an after-hours GP facility. I fully accept that that facility operated quite well for several years in good faith. However, the reality is that it no longer operates because the GPs who service that facility after hours are so overworked that they are finding it difficult to make ends meet on the existing Medicare rebate.
The honourable member for Gosford conveniently ignored that fact totally. There is a massive shortage of general practitioners, and that can be overcome in several ways. However, the Opposition amendment is disappointing. On several occasions the honourable member for Gosford has regaled the House about his alleged Jesuit education. I would have thought one of the benefits of such an education is that it teaches one always to deal in logic. On the one hand the honourable member for Gosford said that there is a shortage of GPs but on the other hand his amendment calls on the State Government to make more money available for the Central Coast Area Health Service, and thus the accident and emergency departments at Wyong and Gosford hospitals. The logic of the honourable member for Gosford has failed, and he admitted as much in his speech today.
People are being forced to go to accident and emergency for the treatment of minor ailments because they cannot see a GP. I do not blame them for that. The Federal Government is guilty of blatant cost shifting. We need GPs on the Central Coast, and the solutions to this problem are clear. The Federal Government must provide more university places for medical students. It should also ensure that medical students are trained on 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6729 the Central Coast because the evidence suggests that medical graduates tend to practise in the areas where they were trained. The honourable member for Gosford criticised the Minister for the Central Coast, who does a great job. Dr Stephen Christley now heads both the Central Coast Health Service and the northern area health service and he has set a priority for more training if medical students on the Central Coast. The honourable member for Gosford should go and see his mate Abbott and convince him that additional Medicare provider numbers based on the geographical area of the Central Coast should be made available.
Ms MARIE ANDREWS (Peats) [4.11 p.m.], in reply: I thank my colleagues the Minister for Gaming and Racing and the honourable member for Wyong for their contributions to the debate. The honourable member for Gosford strayed completely off the track and failed to address the matter under consideration. We represent Central Coast electorates where the shortage of general practitioners has reached crisis point. We live in a modern society and we pride ourselves on the fact that living standards in Australia are equal to the best in the world. So it is appalling that many Central Coast residents cannot see a doctor when they are sick. I have always said that good health is the most important thing in life. The State Government contributes more than $9 billion every year to the Health portfolio, and only slightly less to education. That is an indication of the emphasis that Labor puts on health. Some $190 million is being spent at Wyong and Gosford hospitals on the Central Coast.
Two Federal Coalition members of Parliament represent Central Coast electorates—the member for Dobell and the member for Robertson—and neither has been able to convince his colleagues in Canberra that we need more GPs on the Central Coast. The Medicare issue must also be addressed to encourage GPs to bulk- bill. Even many pensioners must now pay up front when they see a doctor. That is how bad the situation is on the Central Coast. I suggest that conditions there are worse than elsewhere in New South Wales, and perhaps elsewhere in Australia. It does not say much for our Federal Coalition colleagues if they cannot convince the Federal Government that the situation is desperate. We raised this urgent matter today to make honourable members on both sides of the House aware of the critical situation on the Central Coast.
We reject outright the amendment moved by the honourable member for Gosford. The Federal Government has clearly failed to address the shortage of general practitioners on the Central Coast. It has not addressed the bulk-billing issue and it certainly has not done anything to attract more GPs to the region. That is absolutely deplorable. I emphasise that the number of doctors on the Central Coast who bulk-bill has fallen dramatically. In the Federal electorate of Dobell—which is represented by a Coalition member—the rate of bulk-billing fell from 86 per cent in 2001 to just 57 per cent in the September 2003 quarter.
Mr Alan Ashton: That's outrageous.
Ms MARIE ANDREWS: I agree. The figure would be similar in the electorate of Robertson. The situation is probably even worse now. In the Wyong local government area there is only one doctor for every 1,928 people, while in the Gosford local government area there is one doctor for every 1,140 people. One would think we were talking about a Third World country. But this is the Central Coast of New South Wales—which is not too far north of the Sydney metropolitan area. I think it is absolutely shocking that neither of the Federal Coalition members who represent the region has done anything since 1996 to improve the situation. In fact, conditions are worsening as I speak and no-one seems to be doing anything about it. The Federal Government must revise Medicare to encourage bulk-billing and convince more people to become GPs. It has failed the people of the Central Coast very badly. We need a Federal Labor Government to correct the situation.
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! It being 4.15 p.m., pursuant to sessional orders business is interrupted for the taking of private members' statements, and the motion lapses.
PRIVATE MEMBERS' STATEMENTS ______
STRATHFIELD ELECTORATE AUSTRALIA DAY AWARDS
Ms VIRGINIA JUDGE (Strathfield) [4.15 p.m.]: I draw the attention of the House to a number of exceptional residents in the Strathfield electorate who were recently presented with Australia Day awards. There are three local government areas in the Strathfield electorate: Ashfield council, Burwood Council and Strathfield council. Greg Snape is the Ashfield-Leichhardt State Emergency Service deputy local controller and has been assisting the community in times of crisis for the past 23 years. Greg has provided direct assistance to more than 1,000 residents and business owners in response to their requests for emergency help. He is trained and competent in search, flood, building, aerial and confined space rescue. 6730 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
The Young Citizen of the Year award went to Katherine Ngo. Katherine has been involved in numerous community activities, including the Ashfield Youth Co-ordinating Committee, Project Bodywise, Australian Red Cross Trauma Teddy Day, Children's Starlight Foundation Star Day, Salvation Army Red Shield Appeal, Benevolent Society and the Paralympic Torch Relay. The Young Sportsperson of the Year was Lauren Hansom. Lauren finished third at the 2003 New South Wales Figure Stating Championships and was chosen to represent New South Wales last month at the Sunskate Australian National Championships in Brisbane. She has won numerous championships and is considered to be a role model for her peers in the student community.
Lloyd Birdsall received an achievement award. Lloyd is a retired long-term resident of the area who was a founder member of the Ashfield South Ward Action Group and area co-ordinator of Neighbourhood Watch. He does a fantastic job. He is also vice president of Pratten Park Bowling Club, which is one of the great bowling clubs in my electorate. Nell Janssen also received an achievement award. Nell is an active member of the Ashfield Access Committee and vice president of the Inner West Community Transport Committee. She has played a major role in improving access in the Ashfield community. We all benefit from her work, for which I thank her.
The Burwood Citizen of the Year award went posthumously to Father Ezekiel Petritsis. Father Ezekiel established the Greek Orthodox parish and community in Burwood, St Nectarious, in 1970 and served there continuously for 33 years until his death, unfortunately, last year. During this time he established and ran Greek language schools and a Sunday school. He organised activities for older people and established a youth group and ladies auxiliary. He supported numerous other community activities. He was known for his great compassion and love for everyone. He was a prominent member of the Burwood community, and we all sorely miss him.
The Australia Day Young Citizen of the Year award went to Deborah Lau. Deborah has always believed in giving back to the community. She started by doing volunteer work in 1999 at the Annual Lantern Night Festival in Cherrybrook organised by the Cherrybrook Chinese Community Association and has been a regular volunteer ever since. She is involved with the cross-age peer tutoring program run by the Methodist Ladies College and assists younger girls in the homework club. She is a participant in the internationally recognised Duke of Edinburgh Gold Award. In 2002 she was President of the Interact Club and Managing Director of Empiya, a young achievement Australia company. Deborah is a talented pianist and was a finalist in the 2003 2MBS-FM young performers competition. She was invited to give recitals in aged community centres around Sydney. Although the pressures of year 12 will be demanding this year, Deborah fully intends to continue her volunteer work, within both her school and the wider community.
The Service to Youth award was made posthumously to Rob Cleary. Rob gave tirelessly to the community in many capacities but most notably as the immediate past President of the Burwood Chamber of Commerce. Rob was especially dedicated to helping young people through supporting organisations such as the Police and Community Youth Club. Sadly, he passed away last year. Rob's wife was very supportive of his work, and I express the deep sadness of the whole community at his passing. The Strathfield Citizen of the Year award went to Reverend Ivan Roberts, who serves the congregation of Strathfield-Homebush Uniting Church. He has lived in the area for a long time and is well known for the work he has done to foster harmony in the community. His work in the community is greatly appreciated.
Young Citizen of the Year award went to Junji Tai, who is a dedicated contributor to the community. He is a volunteer for the Salvation Army and Red Cross. He is sports captain of that great school Homebush Boys High. He also assists Strathfield senior citizens in his own time. I would like to congratulate all these wonderful citizens on their recent awards, their community awareness and the great contribution they make to the community and from which we all benefit. They are all civic-minded and dedicated, and they and their families should all be commended.
[Private members' statements interrupted.]
SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT
Motion, by leave, by Mr David Campbell agreed to:
That the House at its rising today do adjourn until Friday 27 February 2004 at 10.00 a.m. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6731
PRIVATE MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
[Private members' statements resumed.]
PITTWATER ANIMAL SHELTER CLOSURE
WARRIEWOOD SEWERAGE TREATMENT PLANT
Mr JOHN BROGDEN (Pittwater—Leader of the Opposition) [4.24 p.m.]: I would like to raise two matters involving Pittwater Council about which there is strong community concern. Peggy Brown is one of the great heroes of the Pittwater community. Peggy, her husband, Lionel, and her mother, also named Peggy, have turned their home into an animal care centre. Peggy is known as the cat lady of Pittwater. Abandoned cats in the local community are taken to her home, where they are desexed and cared for until they are healthy. She then finds new homes for them. Peggy is a tireless community worker and a woman for whom I have the highest regard professionally and personally. She and her family have extremely big hearts in sharing their home with animals to ensure that they are looked after properly.
If we had to pay for the tireless hours that they have put in, it would cost the community tens of thousands of dollars every year. Therefore, I take seriously Peggy's genuine concern at Pittwater Council's decision to close the Pittwater animal shelter at the end of January. Unfortunately, council did not consult widely with the community before taking this action. I understand that Pittwater Council made the decision purely on a financial basis. My local electorate is a pet-loving area and many people own dogs. They are extremely concerned at this decision by council to close the shelter.
Apparently, plans have been submitted for the services to be taken over by Pittwater Animal Hospital, situated on Pittwater Road, Warriewood. However, since that announcement Peggy Brown has mobilised an enormous number of community members to become sympathetic to the cause and, as of yesterday when I spoke to her, she had gathered 7,806 signatures and 460 letters. She is working tirelessly for this shelter. I call on Pittwater Council to reconsider its decision because it is out of step with genuine community needs. Indeed, I put the full weight of my support behind Peggy and the community to urge council to reconsider its decision. I appreciate that we are in the lead-up to local government elections and may not see any reaction in the short term. Nevertheless, in late March or early April I would like the new council to fix the problem by providing adequate shelter for local animals that need care.
The other matter relates to the ongoing work that Pittwater Council and I have done together on behalf of, and with, the local community for Sydney Water to cap the Warriewood sewerage treatment plant. That plant was constructed in the 1970s and serves my electorate and the Warringah area. The plant is not covered and has an unpleasant odour, a problem that has been around for so long that many residents have given up complaining about it. The problem is worse between 7.00 p.m. and 8.00 p.m., when it is quite rank. I call on Sydney Water not to abandon negotiations but to ensure that local developers who seek development rights within the buffer zone cover the plant.
I told the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning that it is rare indeed that a matter has the support of the local member, the local community, the local council, Sydney Water, the Environment Protection Authority and those seeking to develop the buffer zone area surrounding the sewerage treatment plant, in return for covering that plant. Despite the initial willingness of Sydney Water to enter negotiations, it is now retreating. If Sydney Water walks away from the table, industrial or commercial development will take place within that zone, and that is not in keeping with the changing character of Warriewood valley. The area now has 1,500 homes and it would be highly inappropriate to allow industrial development in and around that zone. I call on Sydney Water to return to the negotiation table. Council and I have worked too hard on behalf of and with the local community for this matter to be abandoned.
Mr ACTING-SPEAKER (Mr Paul Lynch): Order! I note that the Leader of the Opposition raised more than one matter in his private member's statement, but as a point of order was not taken I did not intervene.
GOROKAN HIGH SCHOOL HIGHER SCHOOL CERTIFICATE RESULTS
Mr PAUL CRITTENDEN (Wyong) [4.29 p.m.]: Last week during questions without notice the Minister for Education and Training informed the House of several students who came first in subjects in the HSC. I would like to advise the House of some excellent results arising from a comprehensive high school in 6732 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004 my electorate, Gorokan High School, which the Minister may not have had time to elucidate on. Rebecca Hennessy was the dux of the school. She achieved a university admission index of 99.35. In chemistry she came third in the State. I have known Rebecca since she was born. She is a young woman of great potential, intellect and personality and I wish her success in the future. Her achievement is all the more remarkable in that her mother, Judy, is a well-respected primary school teacher at Toukley Public School who, unfortunately, has been extremely ill over the past 12 months. Rebecca was able to give her mother assistance and still undertake her study.
Rebecca's chemistry teacher at Gorokan High School, Matthew Le Clercq, should be acknowledged for a job well done. However, I should point out that Rebecca's father, Paul Hennessy, is Deputy Principal of North Lakes High School and was a science teacher, but his specialty was physics. It is good to see that although his daughter has a genetic inheritance, she has branched out from her father. Sam Twyford-Moore achieved equal first place in New South Wales in English advanced extension 2, a tremendous effort. Les Clark, the Deputy Principal of Gorokan High School, was Sam's English teacher. Although Les and I do not always agree politically in an intra-party sense, he is a very dedicated teacher who has achieved great success with Sam.
Many parents of students and students themselves who have been taught by Les appreciate his tremendous effort. He is a great ambassador for the teaching profession and public education. I commend him for his skill, dedication and willingness to go the extra mile. It is unfortunate that the media lampoon teachers as people who treat their job as a 9.30 a.m. to 3.30 p.m. commitment, when many teachers across the faculties at Gorokan High School alone provide extra tutorials, especially in the senior years of school, out of the goodness of their hearts. They also put in a tremendous effort to prepare the tutorials, which is evident in the HSC results to which I have referred. Gorokan High School is very popular in my electorate.
I have advised the House previously of the excellent music program at Gorokan High School, which now has a formal arrangement with the Central Coast Conservatorium, funded through the Ministry for the Arts. I am sure you would be pleased also, Madam Acting-Speaker, that the Central Coast is attracting part of the Arts dollar. With a bit of luck people within the Ministry for the Arts, even Mr Wilkins, the person who doubles as the head of the Ministry for the Arts and the Director-General of the Cabinet Office, will visit the Central Coast to acknowledge their achievements. Gorokan High School is well renowned for producing excellent musicians. Many former students study at the music faculty at the University of Newcastle. Gorokan High School is under the excellent leadership of Alan Arkins. I hope that continues to be so for many years.
Miss CHERIE BURTON (Kogarah—Parliamentary Secretary) [4.34 p.m.]: I thank the honourable member for Wyong for bringing this to the attention of the House. Although the Government fully supports public education and public school teachers, we also recognise teachers who go the extra mile and support students such as Rebecca and Sam. I pay special tribute to Matthew Le Clercq and Les Clark for encouraging students and working with them in their own time to ensure they achieved such excellent results and have such a bright future ahead of them. I wish Rebecca's mother, Judy, all the best for a full recovery from her illness.
STATE FORESTS SOFTWOOD PLANTATIONS PRIVATISATION
Ms KATRINA HODGKINSON (Burrinjuck) [4.35 p.m.]: I bring to the attention of the House an issue that has generated a degree of unity in the Tumut district in my electorate of Burrinjuck. The Carr Labor Government, in its quest to flog off more and more of our public assets, has finally managed to unite every sector of the Tumut community in opposition to the proposed sale of State Forests plantations. Forestry Minister Michael Costa, MLC, has commissioned a report to assess plantation ownership options from the Dutch Bank ABN Amro. I understand that the preliminary report favours the sale of State Forest plantations to an offshore superannuation investment corporation. This first became general knowledge in September last year. In December last year we debated a motion for urgent consideration supporting the Australian Made Campaign. I spoke to that motion, which was moved by the Minister for Regional Development.
This Government has a hide to commission a Dutch company to write a report recommending that we flog off our forests to an offshore superannuation investment corporation. Whatever happened to buying Australian made? It does not happen under the New South Wales Labor Government. The bulk of the plantation assets to be sold in New South Wales are pine plantations spanning more than 200,000 hectares, with a book value of $1.07 billion, and 30,000 hectares of young hardwood plantations. About 120,000 hectares of this forest are located in the Tumut and Tumbarumba areas. Recently the Plantation Ownership Options Scoping Study Steering Committee visited Tumut and other south-west slopes towns dependent on the timber industry. They spoke with local government councillors and visited State Forests facilities and the Visy, Weyerhauser and Carter Holt Harvey mills. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6733
The industrial officer of the local Public Service Association was quoted in the Tumut and Adelong Times as saying that the feeling among State Forests workers is one of anger and that they have the right to feel that way. There was no mention of it prior to the 2003 election, nor was there mention of it at the Labor Party conference in October. By threatening local jobs, the Carr Labor Government has put the unions offside, the public offside, the hard-working State Forests employees offside and managers offside. Everyone is offside with this Government. Mr Costa has even managed to put the environmental lobby offside. The Visy Consultative Committee comprises eminent citizens from the Tumut region. Following the committee meeting a spokesman said:
The sell off has the potential of being disastrous to both the natural and social environment and the economy of the district and regions.
The capacity to fight bushfires is of enormous and vital concern to the local community, which experienced those horrendous bushfires last year. The same spokesperson said:
The community deserves to have confidence in those who maintain our forests should we be faced with the same devastating climatic conditions as last summer. The confidence the community has in the fire fighting skills of the State Forests organisation has been gained over many years, not least in last year's inferno.
I can bear witness to that. State Forests was fantastic in getting the fires under control. One lady who rang my office recently put it more succinctly when she said, "State Forests may not be perfect, but they have gained our trust." By threatening the safety of the community the New South Wales Labor Government has put the people of the Tumut region totally offside. The Mayor of Tumbarumba, George Martin, said:
If some tycoon company in New York were to take the odds, and be guaranteed return of a big insurance payout as against forking out fire protection money, why wouldn't it? State Forests have delivered the goods on fire management as they demonstrated last year locally in magnificent fashion.
He went on to say:
This would reduce jobs in the region and slow the pace of economic development.
By threatening local jobs, economic growth and community safety the Government has put local government offside—not that it needed to do any more after the forced amalgamation fiasco. Mr Gary Price, a Rural Fire Service group captain in Tumut shire, wrote to me recently saying:
The mind boggles at what might happen if the privatisation of State Forests goes ahead. What happens to a private landowner stuck somewhere in the middle or edges of the State Forest in the event of a bushfire.
The other big issue that worries me is whether the volunteers will be prepared to go onto the privately owned plantations and risk their lives fighting for some big multinational company.
Why haven't the RFS been involved in the discussions and meetings so far?
By increasing the threat to the lives of those who have sacrificed so much to protect the community, this Government stands condemned. I have not received one phone call, fax, email, letter or card in favour of the sale of State Forests. The Government has managed a significant feat by solidly uniting everyone in the Tumut and Tumbarumba regions against its push to sell State Forests. I ask all members in this Chamber: When will this antidemocratic, anticommunity, antibusiness, anticountry Government finally get the message that we do not want State Forests sold?
WESTMEAD HOSPITAL TWENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY
Ms TANYA GADIEL (Parramatta) [4.40 p.m.]: I note that the women have the numbers in the Chamber today. I draw to the attention of the House the twenty-fifth anniversary of the opening of Westmead Hospital. Although the actual anniversary was 10 November last year, it was on Friday night that a formal function was held to celebrate this great event. The function, which was attended by 380 people, was held at Lachlans, at Old Government House in Parramatta. I understand that this is the largest group that has ever been catered for at Lachlan's, and they did an outstanding job. The food was fabulous, as always, and the setting was superb. I recommend that honourable members visit Old Government House if they have not already done so. The ghost tour is particularly fascinating, and Aida Mumford does a great job of organising that tour.
The event was well attended. Guests included the Premier, the Minister for Health and one of Australia's finest former Prime Ministers, Gough Whitlam—a Prime Minister with great vision. One of his 6734 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004 finest visions was to recognise that the people of Western Sydney required and deserved a world-class hospital. And that is exactly what we have at Westmead Hospital. Westmead Hospital is a centre of world-class health care. It leads Australia in clinical islet transplantation, curing the first two diabetes patients in the program. Only a handful of hospitals worldwide have had success, and none with the first patients. This is a tribute to Westmead's 10-year islet research effort.
The hospital's innovative research was recognised nationally when the Storr Liver Unit and Renal Medicine was named as a centre of clinical research excellence. Westmead Hospital surgeons pioneered kidney transplants, with the first successful combined pancreas and kidney transplant in Australia occurring in 1987. In the tragic Bali situation the New South Wales forensic dentistry unit at Westmead identified 60 per cent of the disaster victims. Having had my first child at Westmead Hospital in September last year, I can say on a personal level that the care my baby and I received was terrific. Again I place on record my thanks to the wonderful midwives at Westmead Hospital. Next time I hope to be using the new maternity facilities that the Carr Government is committed to building there.
It was a pleasure to listen to some of the current and former staff of Westmead speak about the hospital and their work. Their dedication to the hospital is truly marvellous. Their stories were inspiring. The co-manager for intensive care services for Western Sydney Area Health Service, Kate Needham, spoke about one of Westmead's firsts—an 18-year-old man who received a double lung transplant. She also spoke about how the staff are always delighted to see their patients come back to visit them, although she said that often they could not recognise them. Kate said that they always remembered the relatives because it was they who the staff saw on a regular basis as they sat with their loved ones. The night was truly fantastic. It would be remiss of me not to thank the delightful and effervescent Georgette Hanna, who worked incredibly hard to organise the night. She did a fantastic job; her attention to detail was amazing. The fact that the night went so well can largely be attributed to her efforts. Congratulations Westmead Hospital.
Miss CHERIE BURTON (Kogarah—Parliamentary Secretary) [4.45 p.m.]: The Government joins with the honourable member for Parramatta in congratulating Westmead Hospital on the fine work it does in delivering world-class health services to local residents. Ever since the honourable member for Parramatta has been the local member we have seen fantastic representation in this Chamber for her constituency, and her private member's statement today is another example of that. The electorate of Parramatta has done well to have such a fine representative.
HORNSBY AND KU-RING-GAI HOSPITAL DIABETES SERVICES
Mrs JUDY HOPWOOD (Hornsby) [4.45 p.m.]: Tonight I raise the possibility of creating a diabetes centre at Hornsby and Ku-ring-gai Hospital. I do this after many months of discussions and attendances at meetings with the general practitioner [GP] division in the relevant area group headed by Dr Jim Pollitt, a local doctor who is very concerned about diabetes. Dr Pollitt wrote to me on 5 July last year, and stated:
I am the Chairman of the Hornsby Kuringai Ryde Division of General Practice Working Group in Diabetes. The roles of the Committee include, assisting local GPs in the management of their patients with diabetes (through education and provision of resources), facilitating the "team" approach to the management of this condition and lobbying, where possible, on our patients behalf for improved access to education and treatment.
The Working Group comprises a Diabetes Educator, a Podiatrist and a Dietician from Hornsby Kuringai Hospital, a Physiotherapist, Project Officers from the Division, consumers and local GPs including myself …
Recent large scale studies in the UK and Australia have confirmed that good blood sugar control and attention to risk factor management can very substantially reduce the risk of complications and thus reduce morbidity, mortality and, of course, the cost to the community.
This requires substantial input from the diabetes team of allied health professionals.
With the impending redevelopment of Hornsby Kuringai Hospital our Working Group thinks it is important that serious consideration be given to establishing a Diabetes Centre on the campus where patients can receive co-ordinated and "one-stop" help including education, foot assessment and treatment and dietary advice. At present these activities are carried out in various parts of the hospital with quite unsatisfactory accommodation for the allied health professionals involved and inconvenience and difficulties for our patients, many of whom are elderly with mobility and transport problems.
Today I implore the Minister for Health, the local area health service and the hospital to give serious consideration to creating a diabetes centre. This would mean patients would not have use the stairs to seek help from the diabetes educator on the second floor. There would be a one-stop shop in the vicinity of the hospital's podiatry unit, which is co-located with dietitians. Endocrinologists could be on location as well as the diabetes educator so that patients could receive more co-ordinated care. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6735
There has been a great deal of discussion, and a the hospital has been given a comprehensive submission. The submission states in part that there has been discussion regarding the negative effect of the fragmented nature of the current system of health care delivery to diabetes patients in Hornsby hospital, and that the commencement of monthly diabetes education programs for internal patients and outpatients involving the three departments to which I referred is proving to be very beneficial to patients and an efficient use of staff time and resources. Recently Dr Pollitt wrote to Mr Owen Thomas, the General Manager of Hornsby and Ku- ring-gai Hospital, requesting a meeting. In the letter Dr Pollitt said:
Of utmost importance is a new education room that is accessible to all patients, especially those with a disability.
He also referred to the importance of creating a place where all patients could access information about diabetes, as well as care and future follow-up. I thank Dr Pollitt; Ms Olivia Wood, the diabetes program officer with the GP division; George Barker, the diabetes educator with the hospital; and others who make up the team, including Rae Rosten, who is with Diabetes Australia, and Julie Zwarteveen, the podiatrist. This urgent matter needs to be considered in the context of redevelopment at the hospital. At the meeting with the general manager the team was told that funds would not be available. However, Ryde Hospital has been given Greater Metropolitan Transition Task Force funding, to enable it to establish a similar diabetes centre. Hornsby hospital is in dire need of its own diabetes centres.
BEXLEY ROAD, KOGARAH
Miss CHERIE BURTON (Kogarah—Parliamentary Secretary) [4.50 p.m.]: Today I draw the attention of honourable members to a major issue in my electorate, that is, reckless driving along Bexley Road. I also mention the level of community activity and support that takes place in my electorate. I was doorknocking in my electorate last year and after speaking to residents Michael Kift and Helen Parkinson I became aware of a dangerous situation regarding the tennis courts on Bexley Road, and the need for a guardrail along the southern side of the road adjacent to the tennis courts. Drivers tend to speed down the road, which has a huge dip in it and is probably quite an attraction for reckless drivers. At the bottom of the dip are tennis courts where children learn to play tennis. I have witnessed first-hand some of the reckless driving on that road. Just after I was made aware of the situation a very bad accident occurred when a car went straight through the fence and up onto the courts. It was very lucky that the accident occurred at night and that no children were playing tennis at the time, or the outcome could have been much worse.
Following that incident I contacted residents and gathered signatures for a petition to have speed cameras and a guardrail installed. I took the petition to the office of the Minister for Roads and explained the urgent need for something to be done to protect the residents and the local community. Of course, the Minister took immediate action. Inquiries were made regarding installation of a guardrail but, because of the design of the road, that proved not to be a viable option. The Minister's officers organised a site meeting which local residents and the tennis club operators were invited to attend. The meeting was also attended by Councillor Les Crompton from Rockdale City Council, Helen Parkinson, Mr Michael Kift and Mr Kerry Dock.
A range of options was discussed at the meeting and subsequently it was decided that construction of a jersey kerb would go a long way towards protecting the tennis courts. Construction will begin soon to install approximately 88 metres of jersey kerb along the tennis courts as far as Bardwell Creek. EnergyAustralia will move power poles so that another 70 metres of jersey kerb can be installed from the tennis courts to Kingsland Road. It is expected that the project will be completed by the end of April this year. The outcome is particularly pleasing.
I draw to the attention of the House a real phenomenon in my community—and I am sure that other members have had similar experiences. People went out of their way to express support, sign petitions and attend street meetings. They were really active in helping to bring about improved safety in the area. I pay tribute to them, and I thank in particular Steven Sullivan, Barbara Jones, Daniel Potente, Leslie Crompton, Paola Cester, Adriana Cester, Argirios Spanoudakis, George Vougdis, Zeljko Panic, Daniela Petrocitto, Noel Contemplacion, Maxine Judge, Dule Baturan, Emmanuel Calligeris, Maria Calligeris, Margaret Gill, Suzana Mojsovska and Wayne Cox. They all worked very hard to ensure that this matter was brought to the attention of the Minister's office and to achieve a rapid resolution of the problem.
People continually refuse to adhere to speed limits. They will not drive with caution, and that can have such tragic results. I thank those responsible members of the community for their support. Speed cameras will be installed in the near future. Reckless and speeding drivers should beware: they will be caught. Speeding and recklessness will not be tolerated. I thank the Minister for Roads and his staff for their prompt response. 6736 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
FOREST GLEN ORGANIC FARM
Mr STEVE CANSDELL (Clarence) [4.55 p.m.]: I draw to the attention of the House an innovative, progressive and environmentally sustainable ecotourism development in my electorate of Clarence. The Forest Glen organic farm is situated 15 kilometres outside Coraki and is nestled along the beautifully peaceful Bungawalgin Creek. John and Kathleen Corocher are the proprietors of the original Forest Glen organic tea-tree plantation which they established in 1993 at Bungawalgin in the Richmond River area. They did then, and do now, produce a truly organic tea-tree oil, and most of that is exported to Europe. Subsequent to the deregulation of the dairy industry, which had a major impact on the Richmond River area, and the drop in the price of tea-tree oil because of a worldwide oversupply, the Corochers decided to expand their horizons. So began the concept of the Forest Glen organic farm and ecotourism project. Stage two of the development has taken them six years, and all the designing, developing and building has been carried out by John, Kathleen, their son Adam, and visiting daughters and prospective sons-in-law.
The 155-acre property has been strategically developed for ecotourism and includes 70 acres of sustainable, certified organic tea-tree plantation as well as a successful wholesale organic nursery. The land was strategically cleared, leaving natural bush corridors, creating walking tracks, featuring lagoons, and providing access to Bungawalgin Creek. The lagoons were created naturally. One is 6 metres deep and approximately 70 metres in length. In November 2003 I had the honour of officially opening Forest Glen. After being given a guided tour I was drawn to its natural beauty and I promised myself that I would return in a more relaxed state.
In January I revisited Forest Glen to take full advantage of its peaceful setting and the cool waters of the Bungawalgin Creek. During the day I spent my time exploring the rainforest areas and swimming in the Bungawalgin Creek, which is over 60 metres wide and 17 metres deep in places. It was almost like being in a place where no white man had been before. I also spent my time walking through the forests, counting kangaroos, goannas and many other forms of wildlife. In the evenings I spent time with the Corochers before returning to my tent alongside the creek.
John and Kathleen expressed their concern over something I was aware of from experience—the condition of the road. I travelled 200 kilometres to the property by pushbike and for the last 6.3 kilometres I had to traverse deep corrugations. They told me that in October last year visitors from New Zealand cycled from the Coolangatta airport to Iluka. They were mapping scenic roads to travel and places to stay for group cycling tours from New Zealand. They loved the area but were very disappointed in the 6.3 kilometres of corrugated gravel road which they traversed en route to the farm. They said that when they tried to avoid the corrugations by moving to the side of the road they became bogged in the sand. Their comments about the road were disappointing to the Corochers, but the visitors were very impressed with the farm, the hospitality and the natural surroundings. The Corochers said they can only hope the visitors will retain their farm on the list of places to see.
The Corochers have developed their business over the past 10 years and have invested more than $1 million. They have had a continual struggle to achieve their main goals. The condition of the road represents a constant burden. They set out to create a unique tourist attraction for the Richmond Valley with flow-on effects for the local region and to create local employment. They were successful in obtaining $88,000 in Federal funding toward stage two of the ecotourism project. That has helped the business reach a marketable stage, which would not have been the case if they had not received assistance.
The Corochers need to make another considerable investment in promoting their tourism attraction, but they feel that the money will be wasted if something more permanent is not done about the road. They feel that their future and the probability of achieving realistic goals in the tourism industry are being severely hampered by the poor condition of the 6.3 kilometres of gravel road leading to their farm. Richmond Valley Council is struggling financially but has committed some funding to assist in repairing the road. However, it could be many years before the road is brought to a safe standard. As I stated earlier, the project is innovative. Before the Corochers took over the property the land was covered in tea-tree scrub, but they have turned the property into a very successful tea-tree plantation. The ecotourism project has the potential to be even more successful than the plantation because it represents the principle of working with nature rather than against it. I commend the Corochers for the effort they have put into the project.
LURNEA PUBLIC SCHOOL AIRCONDITIONING
Mr PAUL LYNCH (Liverpool) [5.00 p.m.]: I again draw to the attention of the House and the relevant Ministers the plight of the school community at Lurnea Public School. On 11 November last year in this place I raised the issue of airconditioning at the school in a private member's statement. The issue at Lurnea is a little different from those that frequently occur. Often members of Parliament hear insistent demands that the 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6737
Government immediately aircondition classrooms, but that is not the demand in this instance. The local school community has raised approximately $30,000 to provide airconditioning. As I understand it, approximately eight classrooms already have airconditioning and the school community, having raised that money, wishes to aircondition the remaining 13 classrooms.
The sum of $30,000 is a very substantial amount for a community in south-west Sydney that is not overresourced and is certainly not rich to have raised. The fundraising is an achievement of which the community can justly be proud. The school's need is not to have the Government aircondition the school; rather, it is to provide the infrastructure to allow the school community to install airconditioning. The school has been told and believes that a piece of electrical infrastructure needs to be installed to allow sufficient electricity to reach the school for the airconditioning to be installed and operated.
I understand that the piece of infrastructure is called a kiosk. Mere mortals would probably refer to it as a substation or the green box out the front of the school. As I indicated, I outlined the problem to the House last November. Since then, despite written representations as well as my private member's statement, the school's entreaties have been unanswered. On 13 February this year I had a further meeting with representatives of the school community, specifically Nevile Pringle, Donna Goodman, Tina Harris and Karen McCarren. They provided me with a written statement that stated in part:
The Lurnea school community has been raising funds to aircondition all classrooms of the school for the past 6 years. This has been a huge, long term commitment and approximately $30,000 has been raised, and is currently held for the purchase of the units.
However they cannot be purchased as the school does not have sufficient power available. In fact blackouts are occurring on virtually a daily basis at the moment. The school has airconditioning units already installed in eight rooms. However on some days the school loses power when the units are not all in use.
No one seems to be able to sort out the problem and in the meantime data on computers is being lost, copying machines are breaking down, but most importantly students' learning is being disrupted.
What other government department would tolerate such disruption?
The community does not expect the Government to pay for airconditioning. We just want to be able to draw the necessary power to create the optimum learning environment for our children. Our principal has been told on numerous occasions that the Department of Commerce will investigate the problem. However we know of no outcome, or in fact, if an investigation has actually been undertaken. The school has had problems with heating, and electricity in general, for nearly two years! When is this situation going to be resolved?
The school being 40 years old just does not have the facilities needed to operate efficiently in 2004. Photocopying machines, computers, audio/visual equipment etc ... were unheard of, or certainly not in common use in the 1960's.
The problem has had a long history. In July of last year I received a letter from the then deputy director-general of corporate services indicating that an upgrade of the power supply at the school had been carried out by the Department of Education and Training and had been completed by 16 May 2003. It does not seem to have resolved the problem. The school has been told that it is a problem outside the school in the substation that needs to be fixed. Apparently, on the basis of Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal determinations, if it is a problem with the substation it should be paid for by the department, not by Integral Energy.
To make the position even less clear, I have recently had useful discussions with the office of Minister Sartor, which has been advised by Integral Energy that it is able to provide sufficient energy and it is not a problem with the substation at all. I am obviously interested in getting that advice in writing. It seems directly contrary to what the school has been told, I assume by the property section of the Department of Education and Training. I continue to urge Minister Sartor's office to provide the information it said it would, and I have no doubt it will, provide. I urge the department to look at that advice so that someone can work out precisely what the problem is so that the $30,000 that has already been raised can be usefully expended.
CHATSWOOD PRIMARY SCHOOL CAPITAL WORKS
Ms GLADYS BEREJIKLIAN (Willoughby) [5.05 p.m.]: I raise an issue that is very critical to the electorate of Willoughby, a much-needed capital works upgrade for Chatswood primary school. I state at the outset that this is an outstanding primary school. It is excellent academically and in sport and culture; students flourish in every area of activity at the school. This situation should be nurtured into the future and not threatened. As a product of the public education system I care deeply about children who attend public schools. Currently the school has three demountable buildings and its facilities are much in need of upgrading. I advocate 6738 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004 in this Chamber in the strongest terms that the Minister for Education and Training and his department should meet the requests of the school by ensuring that the capital works project to upgrade the school is given the green light as soon as possible.
I commend the scores of parents who contacted my office by telephone, email and letter to advise me of the school's request for capital works upgrading. I thank them on the public record for bringing this matter to my attention. I also place on record my absolute commitment to the Chatswood primary school community to say that I am behind them 100 per cent and I will fight and advocate on their behalf in this place until the Minister and his department approve the proposed project. Currently there are insufficient classrooms to house all the children, and the library, school hall and toilet facilities are inadequate in size and quality to cater for the number of students enrolled. The number of demountables is also impacting on the already limited playground space. The inadequate accommodation means that many classes are very large.
As the local State member I can state unequivocally that Chatswood primary school has a strong and vibrant school community, which enables the students to excel in all facets of student life—academic, music, arts and sport. I have no doubt that many of the students currently at the school will go on to make an enormous contribution to our community in their chosen careers. But we cannot put this situation at risk. In support of this proposal I have already written to the Minister for Education and Training and to Mr Mike Cush, the relieving general manager of the property department of the Department of Education and Training. The Minister stated in his response to my correspondence that funding for a staged project to upgrade the facilities at Chatswood primary school will be considered in the context of future capital works priorities. Given the Minister's response, I urge him to give priority to the capital works priorities at Chatswood primary school.
The Government cannot impose a medium-density housing strategy in Chatswood, advocating that three residential towers of 30, 20 and 10 storeys be constructed around Chatswood railway station, without giving adequate attention to the infrastructure, which at the moment cannot support such increases in population. If the Government wants to implement medium-density housing strategies that impact on the community of Chatswood and the broader Willoughby electorate it must provide the infrastructure to support high-rise developments. It would be hypocritical of the Government to, on the one hand, advocate policies that would bring in thousands of extra people to the community of Chatswood and the electorate of Willoughby and, on the other, to leave schools such as Chatswood primary school with increasing numbers of demountable classrooms bursting at the seams without adequate infrastructure to support them.
This is an opportunity for the Government to stop its hypocrisy and actually deliver on public education to the local community in Chatswood. I look forward to the Minister and the department meeting this request. I again assure the general Chatswood community and the Chatswood primary school community that I will work hard and take every opportunity I can in this place to support the school's request for the capital works upgrading, and to ensure that students, present and future, have adequate facilities to make the most of their education.
SWANSEA ELECTORATE SCHOOLS CAPITAL WORKS
Mr MILTON ORKOPOULOS (Swansea) [5.10 p.m.]: As I have stated before in this House, the electorate of Swansea is very rich and diverse, with a large number of schools. It has 14 public primary schools and four high schools. We are lucky enough to have three Catholic primary schools—St Brendan's, St Patrick's and St Francis Xavier's—and two independent schools, Belmont Christian College and The Lakes Anglican Grammar School. A number of schools in my electorate have urgent capital works needs. At Belmont High School, where there are 1,100 students, the school hall is grossly inadequate. The school was constructed for approximately 400 students and it now has more than double that number. The classrooms are in need of a significant upgrade, and there are a number of other issues relating to the buildings and staffrooms for the teaching staff. I visited the staff rooms and found them to be totally impractical and inadequate for the teaching staff.
At Swansea High School there is a need for a state-of-the art welding facility. This school offers welding courses for students of not only Swansea High School but also Belmont High School and the Belmont Christian College. There is a need for an industrially approved and up-to-date welding facility there for those students. Belmont North Primary School has a canteen which I would declare to be unfit. The department has recognised this and will be expediting an upgrade of the canteen. Floraville Public School has more than 500 students. It is in dire need of a new library as the current library is totally inadequate for that number of students. The school is also in need of new classrooms and a major capital upgrade. There are other schools in the electorate that are in need of work here and there. 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6739
Given that the Government has allocated $8.7 billion a year to education in this State—a record amount—I am disturbed that the debate in this place, and certainly in the Federal Parliament, is showing a lack of perspective. The Federal Government continues to pour about $1.3 billion into private schools compared with $600 million for public schools. I have a powerful message for the school communities in my electorate: the reason the Government has to stretch the dollar further is that the Federal Government is clearly underspending in public education.
On a State level, primary schools are now funded to the tune of $7,857 per child. At the secondary school level that figure rises to $10,199, making New South Wales the highest spending State on public education in the Commonwealth. Yet we still suffer from the funding formula of the Federal Government that gives $1.3 billion to private schools compared with the measly $600 million to public schools. I strongly agree with our Minister for Education and Training, who points out that given that the Government spends so much educating our students in this State, the Federal Government should come to the party.
LAND TAX
Mr DONALD PAGE (Ballina—Deputy Leader of The Nationals) [5.15 p.m.]: In recent times I have been inundated with concerns from constituents in the Ballina electorate about the Carr Government's land tax regime. Many residents on the Far North Coast have, for the first time, been sent land tax assessments for property they own in the area. For these residents this has been a distressing time: they have been forced to find additional funds to pay their new tax liability or consider selling their property. These are not rich people, they are ordinary working families who have saved hard for retirement and invested in rental property. In some cases, they are now paying more to the State Treasury than they receive from tenants.
More than 110,000 New South Wales residents in the Carr Government's land tax net are now paying more than $1.251 billion a year to Treasury. Not all of those residents are new to the New South Wales land tax regime; some have received previous assessments but have been hit with massive increases this year. One case that comes to mind is that of a couple who, many years ago, bought two small properties in the area as security for their retirement. They have received valuations beyond the $317,000 threshold for both of these properties, and they are now faced with a land tax bill of $4,000, a 115 per cent increase on their land tax assessment for the previous year. That massive increase has been a shock, and they are now seeking an extension of time in which to pay the bill. Like most ordinary families they do not have an extra $4,000 readily available. Their combined family income is a mere $37,000.
One resident is faced with a $10,000 land tax bill on a vacant block of land, an asset yielding absolutely no rental return. How will that resident pay? Another resident, who has an interest in a local pie shop, has a land tax assessment of $17,000, which is an increase from $10,000 in the previous year. This is for a shop in Byron Bay with a three-metre street frontage and a total area of 72 square metres. That constituent has invested in a small business that employs locals, yet he has been hit with a $17,000 land tax bill for his troubles. Another constituent has been hit with a land tax bill on the home in which he has lived for 20 years. He owns a 600 square metre property on which he pays $6,000 in rates and $4,000 in premium property tax. It is a modest property which, because of its coastal location, has been deemed assessable for premium property tax. As I previously mentioned, the owner has lived in the home for 20 years and, whilst his property has increased in value, his ability to pay land tax has not. Perhaps the most heartbreaking example is that of a 70-year-old lady who has been living in her own home in Byron Bay for 19 years. She has a land tax bill of $19,000 this year which she cannot pay. She has considered going back to work to try to earn the money to pay the Premier's land tax so she can stay on in her own home. What a disgrace!
In some parts of the United States of America land taxes are assessed on the value of the property at the time it was purchased. If the property is not subject to land tax at the time of purchase it never will be for that particular owner. Whilst I personally believe that land tax should be abolished because it hits those who are trying to provide for their retirement and not be a burden on the taxpayer, and because it hits both owners and tenants alike, it seems that the United States system is a lot fairer to homeowners who can gauge future tax liability on a property at the time of purchase. Perhaps that is the system the Treasurer had in mind, but did not implement, when he said in his Budget Speech on 2 June 1998:
If you do not pay the millionaire's land tax now, you never will.
In my electorate, as in many other coastal areas, housing affordability is a big issue. Many local families are already struggling to find affordable residential accommodation. The increase in land values and the subsequent increase in land tax are making the situation worse than it already is. The Carr Government should understand 6740 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004 that increasing the land tax threshold in the prevailing property market by a mere 21 per cent from $261,000 to $317,000 in the past year is not enough. Given that average residential land prices in coastal councils outside of Sydney have increased by 39 per cent, with a more than 100 per cent increase in some areas—including in my electorate—the Treasurer should understand that land tax is increasing without a corresponding increase in the ability of a homeowner to pay.
Values are rising much faster than the threshold, so many more people are now subject to land tax. The Treasurer is more than aware that we have the highest land tax rates of any State in Australia. The Carr Government should be concerned about the impact of its land tax regime on New South Wales residents, especially in coastal areas. It should be concerned that those who have carefully saved for their retirement will be left without a nest egg and will become increasingly reliant on governments of all levels for assistance. I call on the Carr Government, as a matter of urgency, to immediately review the untenable land tax regime in New South Wales and become proactive in responding to the obvious need to reform land tax.
MENAI ELECTORATE COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES
Ms ALISON MEGARRITY (Menai—Parliamentary Secretary) [5.20 p.m.]: The electorate of Menai encompasses a large physical area and a diverse community. That fact is amply demonstrated by a glance at my diary for last weekend. On Friday 20 February I attended the launch of the "Creating the Great Kai'mia Way" project by the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning at the Casula Powerhouse. The Great Kai'mia Way is the vision of the dedicated members of two community-based environment groups: the Sutherland Shire Environment Centre and the Georges River Environment Alliance. The feasibility study for the Great Kai'mia Way, which will ultimately be a 250-kilometre network of foreshore reserves, parks, schools, public transport and leisure facilities, was funded from the Carr Government's Georges River Foreshore Improvement Program. The launch was the culmination of a great deal of hard work by those involved. It was also an exciting event because the Minister presented a cheque for $45,000 to kick off the implementation of this worthwhile project.
In the early afternoon of the same day I had the honour of presenting certificates of achievements to aged care workers employed by the Hammond Care Group, which is a leader in the aged care industry. The event was called a "Celebration of Learning", and I assure honourable members that it was exactly that. One of the absolute highlights was a short speech by one of the participants in the Hammond Care Group's Registered Nurse Bursary Program, Sharon Jordan. Sharon, a care worker who has completed subjects in a Bachelor of Nursing degree, offered a very personal perspective that deeply moved everyone in attendance. I also make particular mention of Malcolm Geeves, Corporate Manager, Learning and Development, at Hammond Care. His genuine commitment and enthusiasm for the Careers Pathway programs and the various achievements of the individual staff is truly inspirational.
Later that evening I had the honour of launching an exhibition at the first-class Liverpool Regional Museum entitled "Liverpool 1925-1950". This excellent exhibition brings together art and oral and social histories to tell the story of Liverpool, from the impact of war, depression and industrialisation to the comfort of home and family. Objects, photographs and oral histories are interwoven to focus on the people and events that shaped Liverpool's past in the first half of the twentieth century. On the morning of Saturday 21 February I was pleased to join the Minister for Police and the honourable member for Liverpool at the official opening of the long-awaited Liverpool Police and Community Youth Club [PCYC]. Since this impressive facility first opened its doors eight weeks ago it has attracted many volunteers and members. It provides a wide range of relevant services. I take this opportunity to pay a special tribute to Mrs Flora Reid, a resident in my electorate, for her longstanding determination to see her dream of a PCYC become a reality.
On Saturday evening I attended the Bankstown mayoral ball. This event was a fitting culmination and celebration of the mayoral leadership of Councillor Helen Westwood. Helen is the only female councillor on Bankstown City Council. She has been the mayor since September 2002 and her achievements during this period are highly regarded by the Bankstown community. In fact, she has far too many achievements to detail in the time available today. One of the highlights of the night was an outstanding performance of song and dance routines from the musical Chicago by a very talented group of young people. They are participants in the Bankstown Talent Advancement Program, which is supported by Bankstown council and the Department of Education and Training. I think the honourable member for East Hills has also praised in this House the achievements of that program.
On Sunday 22 February I was pleased to join the Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment and other parliamentary colleagues at the official opening of a golf driving range and additional playing fields at 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6741
Barden Ridge in my electorate. The New South Wales Government has committed to spend $50 million by 2008 on developing state-of-the-art sporting facilities on the old tip site at Lucas Heights. This is a great example of site rehabilitation working for the community. The development of these sporting facilities is being managed by the Sutherland Shire Council, and I make particular mention of the dedicated efforts of Derril Greenway. Mayor of Sutherland Shire Council, Phil Blight, joined the Minister for the Environment to officially open the new facilities on Sunday.
The positive contribution and vigilance of Brian Cloney, Craig Bricknell and other members of the Menai District Sports Association will remain critical to the completion of the remaining much-needed facilities for our community. On Sunday Brian and Craig—ever thoughtful and mindful of any opportunity that presents itself—raised with the Minister and me a commonsense and environmentally friendly proposal to distil leachate from the waste services facility and use it to water the playing fields. I think all honourable members would see the sense in that proposal. Instead of watering the fields with potable water it is looking at using water that would otherwise be dispatched through the waste system. I assure members of the Menai District Sports Association and the Menai community generally that I will pursue this very worthwhile proposal through all possible avenues.
I think honourable members will appreciate from that brief tour of the Menai electorate that it is host to many and varied activities. The Menai community is dedicated to providing the services that are needed in the area. It is my honour to represent the constituents of Menai and to work hard on their behalf.
ONE 2 ONE MENTORING PROGRAM
Mr ANDREW FRASER (Coffs Harbour) [5.25 p.m.]: I wish to express concern on behalf of the co- ordinators—who are mainly volunteers—of a fantastic mentoring program in my electorate called One 2 One. The program was also piloted in Parramatta, with mixed results. However, an independent report about the One 2 One Program in Coffs Harbour found:
Outcomes for young people included: • reduced offending • increased community participation • improved self-esteem and communication skills • more motivation • improved family relationships • improved attitudes and behaviours
"These outcomes were consistent in reports by the projects, by young people, by their families and by police."
Outcomes for the Police included: • improved community profile • due to reduced offending of matched young people. Police can 'take their eyes off them'
"The positive outcomes highlight the potential of mentoring for crime prevention and diversion."
Outcomes in the Coffs/Clarence areas: • increased awareness of youth issues • community capacity building • volunteer recruitment supporting community service • the provision of quality student training placements
"Families in particular noted the changes in the young person's attitudes and behaviour and how much their family relationships had improved as a result. Parents also said that the time out for the young person with the mentor, was also time out for them to spend with their other children."
This is one of the most fantastic programs that I have seen. It costs about $150,000 a year to run. It is estimated that it costs the State $180,000 to keep a young person in custody. It costs the community less than $4,000 per successful mentoring partnership, which means that every young person who is diverted from the downward spiral into detention and gaol saves the State $176,000 per year. The reduction in offending behaviour under this program is immediate and incalculable and it has had a positive impact on community wellbeing.
The program began in 1999 as a three-year trial. The main categories of offences committed by the young people in the program were car theft; break, enter and steal; property theft and damage; and shoplifting. The mentor and mentored young person relationships last for an average of 18 months to two years, and this has had a tremendously positive effect. A group of 15 or 20 people visited my office—it is somewhat ironic that the program is called One 2 One and a crowd turned up—to tell me about this great program. The Federal Leader of 6742 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004 the Labor Party has told the people of Australia that he believes our kids need more mentoring and that, if elected—which is somewhat doubtful—he will commit $30 million to mentoring programs. Yet this State Labor Government has cut off this program at the knees. Sue Kady, the police youth liaison officer, was among those who came to my office, as was the Aboriginal youth liaison officer. They are begging the Government to restore the funding for this program.
I wrote to the Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment about this program on 18 December but I have not yet received a response. Program co-ordinators came to see me again a fortnight ago and we are still waiting for the Minister to respond. If the One 2 One program is forced to close the kids that it is mentoring will return to a life of crime and delinquency. I cannot speak highly enough of this program and I cannot commend highly enough those volunteers who are giving up their time to run the program. I appeal to the Government and to the Attorney General to stop mucking around and to listen to the comments of his Federal leader.
We need more mentoring programs. The Government should continue to fund this program that has been so successful in the Coffs-Clarence region. It is a great program and I ask the Minister for Fair Trading, who is at the table, to take my message to the Attorney General. It is obvious that he does not read his mail as I have sent him two letters about this issue and he has not even acknowledged receipt of them. This program must continue. It keeps kids on the straight and narrow and gives them opportunities in life that they have been denied until now. It helps kids to become good citizens who help others. I ask the State Government to please assist this program.
TRIBUTE TO MS HELEN WESTWOOD AND MR AHMAD EL RICH
Mrs BARBARA PERRY (Auburn) [5.30 p.m.]: I have always felt strongly the need to give honour to those deserving of it. Today I am particularly pleased to bring to the attention of the House two outstanding individuals who deserve our recognition and highest commendation. These individuals, though vastly different in many respects, share decency and a love of and commitment to not only their chosen pursuits but, more admirably, the community whose interests they hold closely to heart. After having achieved what few women in her field could only dream about, Helen Westwood is one of only two female Bankstown mayors to have been appointed in 50 years. Over the years I have developed a profound respect and deep affection for Helen. As a professional she is second to none. Her staff and all who have dealt with her can attest to that fact. Furthermore, she has a remarkable ability to manage people with due respect, warmth and wisdom. She is unfailingly open, approachable and caring. Her contribution to the life of various organisations and initiatives in Bankstown are too many to recount, so a few examples must suffice.
I spoke recently on the Afghani Women Speak Out launch. Helen was present on the day and delivered a moving speech. I know that her friendship and support of the Afghani women has meant much to them. Helen has worked tirelessly in lobbying for the Chester Hill Multipurpose Centre and has been extensively involved in promoting the Talent Advancement Program for young people, which council supports in partnership with the Department of Education and Training. In addition to this, Helen established the Bankstown prevention of sexual assault working party; initiated a leadership program for women of culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds; established a policy of parents rooms in all new and, where possible, existing council facilities; declared Bankstown a refugee-welcome zone; and formed the youth advisory committee, which comprises dynamic young people. As both mayor and councillor Helen places a strong focus on cultivating good relations with and between the various multicultural groups in her area. She has shown true courage and responsible leadership in fighting the tide of ignorance and sensationalism that keeps our community divided and wary of one another.
The second person I wish to commend was born and raised in Auburn. Ahmad El Rich, aged 22 years, is a rising star in Australian soccer. He has been a professional player for Parramatta Power for the past five years. He played in the under-20s World Youth Championships in Argentina in 2001 and was recently picked for the under-23s Olympic team destined for Athens this year. Ahmad is one of only two locally-based players chosen to represent Australia in Athens and is one of the first Australians of Lebanese background to play for Australia in his chosen sport, soccer.
I spoke to him recently after he returned from making his debut with the Socceroos in Venezuela. I was touched by his passion and love for Australia and his desire to see us, as a society, united in acceptance and appreciation of one another. Ahmad has lived soccer since the tender age of four years and by age 17 he was invited to play for the Lebanese national side—an opportunity he admits seemed lucrative at the time—but he 26 February 2004 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 6743 refused. When asked why, his response was that he loves Australia, that he regards it as his country and that he wanted the joy and honour of playing as an Australian. His dream has come true.
Recently, Ahmad donated an item of supreme sentimental value, his first Socceroo jersey, to Westmead Children's Hospital. This was an act of great generosity among others that he performs. I commend him for being such an outstanding role model. Ahmad has spoken of his disappointment and sadness over the excessive media attention given to the few members of the Lebanese community who behave objectionably. He is frustrated and grieved by the fact that we are not made aware of the tremendous contributions to this country by his community and my community of origin, and the respect and love that exist in the community for it. He has pledged to continue to do all he can to promote a better understanding and sense of unity between all Australians. It is with great pleasure that I honour both Helen and Ahmad for their professional excellence and devotion to the betterment of our society. Their simple message of acceptance, friendship and shared humanity is one we need to hear and be reminded of.
YOUTH ROAD SAFETY SEMINARS
Mr ANDREW CONSTANCE (Bega) [5.35 p.m.]: I wish to advise the House of a road safety seminar for young drivers in the Bega electorate. First, I would like the House to note that at a public meeting last night the Federal member for Eden-Monaro, Gary Nairn, stated that the Federal Government had extended the Roads to Recovery Program to Bega Valley Council in the hope that funding will be allocated for Pambula Bridge. That bridge is part of the Princes Highway. The community is pleased that the Federal Government has extended the program but is frustrated that the New South Wales Government has once again failed to meet its responsibilities. The Minister for Roads, Carl Scully, must allocate $5 million in this year's State budget to ensure that the project can commence.
While acknowledging the importance of efficient highways and roads, I emphasise the importance of local programs that endeavour to educate young drivers. To that end, I refer specifically to a program called Stop the 4 O'clock Knock! This is a road safety seminar for young drivers between the ages of 15 and 18 and their parents, who come together to discuss the hazards of driving. The program is run by Frank Bottomley, a compassionate champion of the cause in and around Batemans Bay. Frank runs these seminars throughout country New South Wales and 300 to 400 people attend each seminar. It is important that governments of both persuasions examine the flexibility of funding allocations for these types of seminars. Those who run local programs are striving for better outcomes for their communities. Frank Bottomley took on the challenge following an accident involving his teenage stepson. The first seminar was attended by 400 people and has led to further seminars, attracting many people throughout country New South Wales.
Each seminar runs for about two hours, during which time young people are shown a confronting and graphic video. Guest speakers include emergency services personnel such as highway patrol officers, trauma physicians and ambulance officers. Frank always tries to have at least one speaker who has been involved in a road accident, as often this has a significant impact on the participants. Frank seeks to bring together the various public agencies that have direct and indirect involvement. He tries to involve schools, which can share expertise and experience with the community. The aim of the program is to reduce the number of car accidents. It addresses key issues such as inexperience, overconfidence, risk taking and peer pressure. As young drivers aged between 17 and 25 years comprise 16 per cent of the driving population but account for more than 30 per cent of road trauma statistics, seminars that encourage young drivers to do the right thing are certainly appropriate. As Frank is keen to have the Government to work in partnership with him, I encourage it to do so through the Premier's Department.
PARKES HIGH SCHOOL AIRCONDITIONING
Mr TONY McGRANE (Dubbo) [5.40 p.m.]: I bring to the attention of the House concerns of the Parkes council about airconditioning in the Parkes High School. I refer to the appalling conditions that students of Parkes High School have been forced to endure this summer. The hot spots policy of the Department of Education and Training is failing the students of Parkes High School. The piecemeal approach to the installation of airconditioning units at this school has gone on for far too long. The situation literally boiled over this summer with conditions in classrooms so hot this month that one day 15 teachers suffering from heat-related conditions went home, and the entire student population staged a walkout in protest at their primitive conditions. Staff and students have complained of heat-related conditions including headaches, nausea and heat stress. The situation was made worse because only one water bubbler has been working. 6744 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY 26 February 2004
At the start of this summer only nine of the school's 60 class and administration rooms were airconditioned. Six more rooms are in the process of being airconditioned, leaving the bulk of the school sweltering through one of the town's hottest summers, if not the hottest, on record. The school staff and the principal have gone to great lengths to try to maintain a productive learning environment by rotating classes through the cooler rooms and by increasing class numbers in the airconditioned library, hall and computer rooms. Their efforts have had only moderate success: one cannot squeeze 800 students into a handful of airconditioned rooms. The school should be brought into line with the majority of public schools throughout New South Wales by installing airconditioning in all classrooms and administrative offices.
Students, staff and parents have been pushing for more than a decade to have this work done. They are sick of being told that Parkes is not a priority. If this summer's conditions do not constitute a priority or an urgent matter, I would hate to see what does. The Department of Education and Training's airconditioning program is designed to ensure that hot spots within schools with an average maximum temperature above 30 degrees are provided with airconditioning. This policy is a dismal failure at Parkes High School. The mean maximum temperature in Parkes for January was almost 35 degrees, with teachers recording temperatures in some classrooms closer to 50 degrees. Parkes endured a record seven straight days in January and February when temperatures reached in excess of 40 degrees. How are children supposed to learn in those conditions when they do not have airconditioning?
It does not get much better outside, either. On an ABC radio interview earlier this month the Minister for Education and Training suggested that children could go outside to sit in cool areas. That same day the temperature in the Parkes playground area was 52 degrees. Another suggestion was to amend school hours. The following day it was 31 degrees at 6.00 a.m. and it was still 36 degrees at 10.00 p.m. There is no quick fix or easy way out in this case. Parkes High School must be fully airconditioned. I have received hundreds of letters and emails from students, parents, staff and concerned community members. The people of Parkes have come out in force to support the concerns of their high school.
Almost 2,000 people have signed a petition calling for full airconditioning to be provided for the school. The Parkes community has worked tirelessly to raise money to provide cooling. Even last week one parent purchased and donated 12 electric fans to help ease the worst of the conditions. Unfortunately, these proud gestures were ineffective in providing genuine relief from extreme heat. They should not have had to be made. Every other school in the surrounding region that endures similar weather conditions enjoys government- funded, airconditioned rooms. Why should Parkes miss out? The main classrooms in the school are in redbrick buildings established in 1969. The majority are equipped with ceiling fans of the same vintage, many of which no longer work. It is time to end this piecemeal approach and make the cooling of Parkes High School an absolute priority. The Government should get serious about implementing its hot spots policy and provide a suitable learning environment for the young people of Parkes. The people of Parkes deserve better than what they are getting from the Department of Education and Training for Parkes High School.
Private members' statements noted.
The House adjourned at 5.45 p.m. until Friday 27 February 2004 at 10.00 a.m. ______